User:Rursus/Kill

Templates

 * Category:Inline dispute templates
 * Hepp
 * Hepp

Zone of Sudden Death
/Kill

Deletion
Leading principle of this examination:

I'm a common-sense-inclusionist: if the article is not blatantly irrelevant for WP, then it should be kept. "Blatantly irrelevant" means:
 * RK1: hoaxes, pure delusions,
 * RK2: incoherent and confused mess,
 * RK3: blatant self-promotion,
 * RK4: neologisms used for self-promotion and political purposes and
 * RK5: failed neologisms.

Places for discussions:
 * Articles for deletion
 * Category:AfD debates (Science and technology), a category where the current deletable science and technology debates are kept,

Future:

Tools:
 * Checklinks

Article quality
The article quality regarding religion and philosophy is low. Articles on religion attracts lots of scribbling activity from outside street preachers that disrupts the articles, the articles acquires trivial side information only, and very often POV-pusher user filibusters the pages with WP:SYNTH/WP:OR.

Classification of bad quality articles
The classification is prototypical, not regular. It is based on experience of perceived (subjective) flaws of the articles in question, thinking according the principle that an article should be readable for the not-quite inaugurated, correct, accurate, informative and present a coherent topic.

D-class: Too big mess
Description: Cleanup: Todo:
 * the article contains pretty reliable information, but in disorder, the wrong kind of information, and too detailed to be of any real use for the student
 * build a new article kernel, where intro, definitions and background is thorougly worked through
 * Moses
 * Stellar classification (formerly?)

D-class: Definition/Cause confusion
Description: Cleanup: Todo:
 * the article confuses an observational phenomenon with the most commonly theorized underlying mechanism/cause
 * Type II supernova (formerly?)
 * Linguistic modality (confuses modality with mood)

E-class: Street preachers sermon
Description:
 * an article that has a name covering a valid coherent term/topic
 * the article is full of WP:OR, personal opinions, primary source citations (f.ex. bible citations) to support those opinions, the entire article providing a WP:SYNTH and a blatant non-WP:NPOV,

Cleanup:
 * street preachers sermons should be totally rewritten, or in the case that the sermon overwrites a former real article, it should be reverted

Todo:
 * Talk:Hyper-Calvinism
 * Talk:Satanism

F-class: Pseudo-term article
Description:
 * an in-coherent collection of various terms and topics of the same name, collected into one article falsely giving the impression that there is a coherent concept related to in the article
 * the collection is not a list of related or species-similar objects/topics
 * the collection instead promotes a certain POV by producing an ESSAY

Cleanup:
 * pseudo-term articles should be ripped apart into real topics, and the topics should be redistributed into other articles

Todo:
 * Militant atheism, no such term
 * Catholic–Eastern Orthodox theological differences falsely connects the "modalism" that orthodox churches accuse Augustine for with "modal logic" contrafactually claimed to be created by Aristotle, Platon and "Pythagorus"

Modalism
Modal logic has its origin in Hellenic philosopher, including Pythagorus, Plato and Aristotle, who based their dialects on Monism as the concept that ontology can be reduced to either a single detectable substance (called substance theory) and or a single being (the concept of the Absolute). Modal logic is by definition any system of logic that deals with possibility, potential and necessarily (which is dependent on actuality). See also Aristotle's Potentiality and actuality. Modalism is the way ontologically that Hellenic pagan philosophy starting with Pythagorus and following through Plato, Aristotle and Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism, analytically and dialectically deconstructed human consciousness and existence in order to represent their view of the monad as the "idea" of God and ousia as the essence or universal of being. Modalistic in the idea of God as of a single substance or being (ousia) called the monad that then emanates sequentially various realities (hypostasis). These realities which then amalgamate with one another i.e. as in the Neoplatonism of Plotinus; the Monad (the dunamis, potentia) and the Dyad (creator, energeia, actus) both emanate the Triad, Trinity (Spirit or World Soul). Plotinus teaching that energy or actus has to have force or potential in order to emanate (dunamis or potential defined as indeterminate vitality according to A. H. Armstrong). These realities coalesce into the material world (cosmos) or Universe. Here Thomas Aquinas in his Five Proofs of the Existence of God starts from the pagan philosophers rational proofs of the existence of the Pagan creator God. Hellenistic paganism's God which is modalist God of idealism. These hypostases appear as a descending hierarchy reciprocally reflecting each other. The Orthodox teach that God is not of a substance that is comprehensible since God the Father has no origin and is eternal and infinite. God the Father is the origin, source of the Trinity not God in substance or essence. Therefore the consciousness of God is not obtainable to created beings not in this life or the next (see apophatism). Though through co-operation with God (called theosis) Mankind can become good (God like) and from such a perspective reconcile himself to the Knowledge of Good and the Knowledge of Evil he consumed in the Garden of Eden (see the Fall of Man). Thus returning himself to the proper relationship with his creator and source of being.

On the talk page: Modalism bogus discourse
The section modalism seems to be a mess of confusion upon confusion, so let me relate to how I believe: so the statement
 * Aristoteles did not invent modal logic, he made a treatise that modern researchers interpret as a precursor to modal logic, Avicenna did however invent a temporal logic, and that is a modal logic,
 * Plato wasn't involved in this,
 * Pythagor a s has nothing in common with neither Aristoteles nor Plato, he is irrelevant in the context,
 * modal logic has nothing whatsoever to do with modalism,
 * Aristoteles's and Plato's God theories have nothing to do with modal logic,
 * Modalism is the way ontologically that Hellenic pagan philosophy starting with Pythagorus and following following through Plato, Aristotle and Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism, analytically and dialectically deconstructed human consciousness ... blablabla

is the  purest bombastic bullshit  I've seen on Wikipedia: WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, WP:HOAX, WP:NOTESSAY, ... Rursus dixit. ( m bork3 !) 15:53, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Editing in own-POV topics
Inflating blatantly unreliable data blocks:

A case of essentially benevolent POV-misrepresentation of sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, made articles on a certain theme endemically unreliable.

Another constructive existential intermittently but rarely constructed discourses based on leaps-to-conclusions.

A POVvy interaction

Topic avoidance
Some supporting-beam topics are systemically avoided:
 * theology: obviously too complex, since it involves advanced logic perspective switches,