| Revision as of 11:21, 18 April 2020 editSmokeyJoe (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers44,272 editsm →Cultural impact of Michael Jackson: xfd← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:17, 18 April 2020 edit undoIsraell (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers2,940 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| Given all of the misconduct and clear-cut deceptive tricks performed by the "keep" votes, one can be easily convinced that not only the "keep" votes lacked any basis to debunk the nomination but demonstrated a lack of ]. With the formation of such a toxic environment, it must have either falsely convinced many of the editors to either suggest "keep" or just leave the AfD. Nevertheless, there appears to be enough support for the deletion. ] (]) 10:38, 18 April 2020 (UTC) | Given all of the misconduct and clear-cut deceptive tricks performed by the "keep" votes, one can be easily convinced that not only the "keep" votes lacked any basis to debunk the nomination but demonstrated a lack of ]. With the formation of such a toxic environment, it must have either falsely convinced many of the editors to either suggest "keep" or just leave the AfD. Nevertheless, there appears to be enough support for the deletion. ] (]) 10:38, 18 April 2020 (UTC) | ||
| {{ping|JG66}}, what do you have to say about all that? For some obvious reason, Excelse has completely omitted the fact IP address ], '''a brand-new user''', '''only''' appeared on Misplaced Pages for that vote and did indulge in vote-canvassing . They've never ever posted anything ever since. (Their very first edit is a vote regarding the 'List of postal codes in Portugal'; that vote appears to only have been cast to avoid an accusation of ].) | |||
| Excelse is not assuming good faith, accusing many "Keep" editors of being SPAs or what not. The "Keep" voters made a very strong point as to why the article must remain, and '''serious, constant efforts''' have been made to improve the article—the article was greatly improved, all POV/puffery was removed, and the article is constantly being enriched and improved in tone, content and quality (and Michael Jackson has undisputedly had a tremendous cultural impact). There is therefore no reason '''whatsoever''' to delete it. Any call for deletion at this point, in my observation, is purely partisan. I have ''nothing'' more to add on this issue. ] (]) 12:17, 18 April 2020 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:17, 18 April 2020
< 2020 April 17 Deletion review archives: 2020 April 2020 April 19 >18 April 2020
Cultural impact of Michael Jackson
Closing note as well as the subsequent discussion failed to find a rationale behind the close as "no consensus". The correct result of the AfD had to be delete because of the following reasons:
- The article is a WP:POVFORK because all content already exists on Michael Jackson. Article violates WP:OR because of gross misrepresentation of sources and it reads like a total WP:FANPAGE.
- Not a single !vote rejected the fact that the article is a WP:POVFORK, WP:OR and WP:FANPAGE.
- "Keep" !votes only depended on WP:PLENTY, WP:SOURCESMAYEXIST and WP:Clearly notable.
- Off-wiki canvassing and meatpuppetry is a established concern regarding this subject and this has view has been successfully established per this WP:AN thread.
- At least 8/18 Keep !votes were made by off-wiki WP:CANVASSED editors who were not editing for weeks or months before the creation of the AfD. One "Keep" admitted that he was recruited off-wiki.
- On-wiki canvassing was also carried out by Keep supporters.
- One editor who voted for "keep", was calling every "delete" supporter a troll and accusing them of malice. He was topic banned.
- Many "keep" !votes were only spewing their obsession about Michael Jackson, personally attacking editors, bludgeoning, and falsely accusing participants of racism.
- Not a single admin supported keeping the article but multiple admins like Neutrality, Drmies, supported deletion of the article.
Given all of the misconduct and clear-cut deceptive tricks performed by the "keep" votes, one can be easily convinced that not only the "keep" votes lacked any basis to debunk the nomination but demonstrated a lack of WP:AGF. With the formation of such a toxic environment, it must have either falsely convinced many of the editors to either suggest "keep" or just leave the AfD. Nevertheless, there appears to be enough support for the deletion. Excelse (talk) 10:38, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
@JG66:, what do you have to say about all that? For some obvious reason, Excelse has completely omitted the fact IP address 173.79.47.227, a brand-new user, only appeared on Misplaced Pages for that vote and did indulge in vote-canvassing . They've never ever posted anything ever since. (Their very first edit is a vote regarding the 'List of postal codes in Portugal'; that vote appears to only have been cast to avoid an accusation of WP:NOTHERE.)
Excelse is not assuming good faith, accusing many "Keep" editors of being SPAs or what not. The "Keep" voters made a very strong point as to why the article must remain, and serious, constant efforts have been made to improve the article—the article was greatly improved, all POV/puffery was removed, and the article is constantly being enriched and improved in tone, content and quality (and Michael Jackson has undisputedly had a tremendous cultural impact). There is therefore no reason whatsoever to delete it. Any call for deletion at this point, in my observation, is purely partisan. I have nothing more to add on this issue. Israell (talk) 12:17, 18 April 2020 (UTC)