General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAnother DU attack - on Wiki?
Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page.
Feel free to edit the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the guide to deletion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Underground
NRaleighLiberal
(60,014 posts)MineralMan
(146,287 posts)Wikipedia is a weird place. Anyone can propose anything there. The article on DU won't be deleted. Cooler heads will prevail.
N.B. - I'm not a participant at Wikipedia, but nothing can happen without a discussion. Since this nomination for an Article for Deletion was just posted today, no discussion has taken place. I expect that any such discussion will lead to the conclusion that the article on Democratic Underground should remain on Wikipedia.
People do this sort of attack all the time. The person who nominated the article for deletion has no credibility or activity on Wikipedia, as far as I can see.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,308 posts)following the link in that box at "please share your thoughts"
MineralMan
(146,287 posts)I assume there will be responses to this nomination for deletion. I've just never gotten involved in Wikipedia editing.
pkdu
(3,977 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)I also disagree with deletion. A simple Google News search on "Democratic Underground" results in 25000+ articles about DU from all kinds of news sources including major newspapers around the world. Let me know if anyone needs me to post specific links on that because there are many. Anyone saying DU fails on notability grounds has simply not done any research at all to determine if that is so. Steven Leser (talk) 18:17, 19 November 2016 (UTC) Steven Leser
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)of people 'criticizing' DU for being DU, rather than critiquing the factuality and related citations in the "article" entry.
It's alarming how public censorship is becoming so common place and acceptable.
phallon
(260 posts)for exercising free speech? That's what I got from this link.
Mosby
(16,301 posts)Who the hell cares what the Antisemites at salem-news think about DU.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)First, all the negative criticisms disappeared - and what little there was about DU. Two paragraphs, basically.
Now, nothing but the "bad" is back!
I have to admit, Wiki confirmed DU credibility for me when I first stumbled on it - and I don't mind it is being watched by the powers that be - "A kicked dog howls loudest!" - but these repeated attempts to make DU disappear are starting to piss me off big time!
tritsofme
(17,376 posts)Unless you regularly edit and contribute at Wikipedia, let the system work itself out.
I think this community easily stands on it's merits, but the perception of canvassing would more than likely serve only to irritate regular contributors and hurt our cause.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)And the multiple voices calling for DUs deletions may come to seem like consensus.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)Raine1967
(11,589 posts)This is messed up.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)I'm sorry I wasted so many years there, but really, it is a sad cesspool of misogynistic man-children only a few steps removed from the alt-right.