6 days before Disclosure.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surges of Government Activity in August, 2018
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
Jump to navigation | Jump to search
Surges of Government Activity in August, 2018 [edit]
(edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · newspapers · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · HighBeam · JSTOR · NYT · TWL)
Unsourced and poorly written article proposing the existence of a rumored phenomenon. Pinatri (talk) 02:54, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
> That doesn't feel right. For one thing, at the time of nomination it had 4 citations. The sources appear dubious, but, by definition, this is not an unsourced article.
Secondly, if "poorly written" were grounds for deletion, Wikipedia would have exactly one page, reading "Proposition: Let's allow the poorly-written articles".
Thirdly, the trend does appear to exist, even if not in such a drastic manner as the article proposes. [Arab Institute for Training and Research in Statistics]: Worldwide Administrative Activity Report for August 15th, 2018: "The average second order derivative of visible governmental activity in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Central African Republic, China, Cuba, Czech Republic, Egypt, Finland, France, Greece, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, North Korea, Macedonia, Mongolia, Romania, Russia, Serbia, South Africa, Thailand, United Kingdom, United States of America, and Vatican City have reached at least a yearly maximum during a period from July 27 to August 7... This would not be an extraordinary event if 2-6 countries were involved, but the scope of the phenomenon suggests the existence of an unknown worldwide trend ... Our colleagues in USA [190], India [191], and Japan [192] could not provide a satisfying explanation of the event, ... analysis is inconclusive." I'll adjust the style of the article, add this source, and do a little more research. It would help enormously if someone who has experience in this field of applied statistics were able to help on this AFD. Meanwhile, I would suggest to KEEP the article. MindJanitor42 (talk) 10:11, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>> What methods can even be used to estimate the government activity of a country? What measure? That parameter appears unquantifiable. Wikipidor413 (talk) 10:47, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>> This source apparently uses "total estimated active working hours per day of high and middle echelons of government". A lot of methods are used, from tracking the internal illumination of government buildings to counting the number of invited consultants. MindJanitor42 (talk) 12:19, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>> Well then, I vote for KEEPING the article. Wikipidor413 (talk) 17:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>> Sources are acceptable, honestly, but the big problem with the article is what seems to be unsourced assumptions and conjectures. Remember, a person who wrote this proposed supernatural influence as "one of the most reasonable possible explanations" Pinatri (talk) 18:30, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>> Heh. Honestly, those assumptions may pose less of a problem than you all think. I vote to KEEP this article, as a memento. We probably will need one soon. Panopticon (talk) 19:01, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>> Wait... Panopticon? It feels weird to hear things like this from a person who served as a Wikipedia administrator for the last 7 years.
As for the article, DELETE this conspiracy theory garbage. I mean, it uses WikiLeaks as a source! BatmanOfFacts (talk) 19:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>> Still am. An admin, I mean. People change, however. Yeah, we will all change. A lot. Mark my words. Panopticon (talk) 19:19, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>> Panopticon IS weird lately. He wrote more than a thousand articles over the course of 9 years, at least one every week, but for the last two months he almost stops his participation, and NOW writes mysterious off-topic remarks and seems to forget that Wikipedia is WP:NOTMEMORIAL.
That said, BatmanOfFacts's argumentation about deleting the article makes no sense. WikiLeaks may be an unreliable source, but what about other four? And the most outlandish content was removed by MindJanitor. I say KEEP it for now. StrawberryFieldsForever (talk) 19:46, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>> Yeah, no doubt there, late Panopticon surprises me. Or should I say, late Wikipedia surprises me? Many old faces just paused their activity... yes, about two months ago. Some said they went on a different project, but none said which... Maybe we need a statistical research of Wikipedia activity? Anyway, the article is much better now, but still needs more sources to confirm the existence of such a bizarre phenomenon. Pinatri (talk) 19:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>> Soon you will all see our project. Just wait a week or so. Panopticon (talk) 19:59, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>>> "Panopticon", stop. You are crossing the line of what you can say and what you can't. The article should be DELETED. ColonelPJL (talk) 20:09, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>> Yeah, we need. Perhaps we could even find a correlation. StrawberryFieldsForever (talk) 20:06, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>> Why are we even arguing? This article obviously doesn't meet the notability criteria. If we recorded every statistical fluctuation, we would run out of space on our servers in days. DELETE. OccultHand (talk) 19:13, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>>> Well, it is a very global trend, and we have not a single idea what could have caused it. StrawberryFieldsForever (talk) 19:30, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>> You are all so THICK! You would not open your eyes to the truth even if it crawled out of your goddamned chest! This "activity"... THIS IS THE ACTIVATION OF ALL CONSPIRACIES! THEY PREPARE TO FINALLY TAKE US ALL OVER! WE HAVE NOWHERE TO RUN - IN A WEEK, THE ILLUMINATI WILL ENSLAVE OUR PLANET WITH THE HELP OF SMALL MAGICAL HORSES! THE MARCH OF THE HORSEMEN OF THE APOCALYPSE IS AT HAND! CrushThePyramid (talk) 20:12, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>>> Oh god, one of those conspiracy nuts. They seem unusually ridiculous and unusually coherent lately. Pinatri (talk) 20:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>>>> Please, don't say that this is an author of this article. StrawberryFieldsForever (talk) 20:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>>>>> No, he isn't. Pinatri (talk) 20:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>>>>>> Phew. As you said, those people lately... wait.
Wait.
Unusually coherent?
Call me mad, Pinatri, but this AFD discussion has convinced me… something is going down. StrawberryFieldsForever (talk) 20:19, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>>>>>>> ..............yeah. Pinatri (talk) 20:19, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. Yes it does. Oh, and KEEP the article. Just trust me on this one. Adios! Sombra (talk) 20:20, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Categories: AfD debates (Society topics); AfD debates
This page was last edited on 26 August 2018, at 20:20 (UTC).
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.