Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alt-right pipeline

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was SNOW keep‎. (non-admin closure) Aaron Liu (talk) 23:46, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alt-right pipeline

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is sourced almost entirely to puff piece 'studies' with no real peer review and opinion articles, with a number of the quoted studies showing the exact opposite of the article's premise. To be blunt, this article is just as much of an opinion piece as the many, many crappy opinion pieces it cribs from. Because the purpose of the article is begging the question, it should either be shitcanned or, at best, heavily reworked to make it quite clear that it's a conspiracy theory. Jtrainor (talk) 20:23, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep – this is a GA and the nomination doesn't actually provide a good reason for deletion. If there are issues with the article, I suggest suggesting changes on talk, instead of starting an AfD. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 20:28, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Internet. Shellwood (talk) 20:31, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as creator, the nomination is an WP:IDONTLIKEIT argument. Something felt off about this, since an IP deleted a bunch of reliable sources just a little while before this, and apparently this user has already been warned for frivolous deletion nominations multiple times going back to 2011: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1111#Jtrainor and XfD. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The promotion of this article to GA status already indicates that it meets the notability threshold. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 20:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vacant0 This case aside this is very not true. We have deleted many GAs. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:46, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Such as? Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 20:47, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vacant0 Off the top of my head: The Master (Fallout), Klobb, I recall several others.

Hell, we have deleted Featured articles.
Lewis (baseball)

ESRB re-rating of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

Neil Harvey with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948

Lakitu

Spoo (food)

Torchic

Ron Hamence with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948

Tropical Depression Ten (2005)

All were once FAs. Means nothing (they all are redirects now) PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although a rare occurrence, this is interesting... Still, this topic has clearly been covered by several studies and was also analysed in journals and newspapers. Some references briefly mention the term and its definition, while some go into detail. The article meets the WP:GNG. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no opinion on this AfD, I am just a pedant. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:06, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: 8 and 9 are strong sources about this concept, mostly using Youtube as an example. I suppose the article could be refocused more towards that site, but this isn't a clean-up effort. Oaktree b (talk) 21:02, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: no valid deletion argument provided. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:34, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep: If you don't like the provided sources, discuss them on the relevant talk page. I wish to emphasise Thebiguglyalien's comments. WP:SNOW applies. pluckyporo ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:54, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(note that SNOW and WP:speedy keep are different things), though both apply here. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:42, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that is possible for a non-admin to close an AfD as keep. See WP:NAC if anyone that's not involved wishes to give it a try. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 02:05, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend that this AfD be closed pursuant to WP:SK unless further justification is provided. pluckyporo ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:31, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clovermoss, this AFD was closed as a NAC but it wasn't done correctly so I reverted it. No problem if a more experienced editor who is familiar with AFDs and closures takes this on. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:26, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep sorucing presently in the article shows a clear pass of the WP:GNG. FWIW, personally, I do not see speedy keep criteria WP:CSK being met here (in this case, the main ones being: there is a deletion rationale - sourcing issues - there's no nominator withdrawl and it is not *unquestionably* vadalism or distruption). That said, a WP:SNOW closure can be appropriate here. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 07:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.