Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/9/11 + The Neo-Con Agenda Symposium (second nomination)


 * 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 no major consensus = keep — FireFox  ( talk ) 16:28, 30 August 2006

9/11 + The Neo-Con Agenda Symposium
First Deletion Reason -- delete and merge into 9/11 Truth Movement, meetings subsection. This gathering is not notable enough by itself to have a separate page. There's a place for it at the Neo-Con Agenda Symposium here. I also question that we need 12 Alex Jones forks on Wikipedia, of which this is one. See Alex Jones (radio), Prisonplanet.com, 9/11 + The Neo-Con Agenda Symposium, InfoWars, Infowars.com, America Destroyed By Design, TerrorStorm, Information Clearing House, Martial Law: 9/11 Rise of the Police State, 9-11: The Road to Tyranny, Dark Secrets: Inside Bohemian Grove, Police State 3. Morton devonshire 01:17, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Very notable, given it's breadth of media coverage. Washington Post, Reuters, and a bunch of international media not enough? Also please note this user has been on AfD Spree, based on his personal beliefs (sorry Mort). As for other smaller ones, if on their own they're not notable enough, merge them in. This one has legs based on all the international coverage and interest. rootology (T) 01:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * strong keep: Per above, previous AfD rationale.  Ombudsman 01:43, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep per Rootology; large amount of media coverage from notable sources.--TBC TaLk?!? 01:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete and merge into 9/11 Truth movement or reynolds wrap or someplace that is a larger overview. Not notable as a separate article.  This is a conference of the "truthers".  Cover it there.  --Tbeatty 03:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * What do you think of all the media coverage? rootology (T) 03:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't say the event wasn't notable as a part of 9/11 Truth Movement. It just doesn't need it's own article.  A one or two paragraph blurb in anohter article that is covering the same stuff is sufficient.  This is a form of '9/11 Truth Movement' spam.  It will be cruft once everything dies down.  Let's merge it now before it we have all these dead cruft forks.  Let's put it this way: GWB takes a vacation every year.  He makes speeches all across the country.   They ALL receive considerable media attention (more than this conference) but they are included in Wikipedia in the many broader articles that cover the administration and Bush.  We don't have articles that are "May 9 Bush Speech to Veterans in Kansas".  It's too arbitrary a collection.  Consolidate this into the broad overview of "9/11 Truth Movemment" and be done with it. --Tbeatty 03:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Strong Keep Important! --Prof.Thamm 08:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC) Delete Per Nom and Tbeatty. Æon Insanity Now! EA!  03:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge this into 9/11 Truth Movement...we don't have an article on every conference held worldwide...what makes this one so special? Nothing.--MONGO 03:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Tbeatty. CRGreathouse (talk | contribs) 04:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Very notable indeed. This article is being attacked (in a biased campaign for deletion against anti-bush topics) for the POV of the subject matter, independently from the POV within the article. Note that this campaign is being done in the name of NPOV, while clearly attacking only a specific POV is POV in itself. PizzaMargherita 05:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per PizzaMargherita and others. &mdash; Khoikhoi 08:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Turnkey event in 9/11 Truth movement attracting unprecedented media coverage and attendance over one the most politically contentious issues in the world. SkeenaR 08:43, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete not sufficiently notable for an independent article given the massive over-representation of Alex Jones articles. I question whether PizzaMargherita's comment helps the keep cause as topics that are anti-X are inherently POV. MLA 10:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You are confusing a POV subject matter (which is perfectly acceptable in WP) with a POV presentation of the subject matter. Some serial AfD proponents (as well as yourself, it would seem) do not understand that the former does not imply the latter, and that their fixating on nominating only articles that focus on a specific subject matter is instead POV. I hope this clears things up. PizzaMargherita 11:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is also looking for balance. 1 article on the round earth theory vs. 15 on the flat earth theory, regardless of how NPOV the 15 are presented violates Wikipedia policy.  Proposing a merge or delete of the 15 articles down to one is to be commended and strived for.--Tbeatty 17:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You are confusing science with politics. On the same grounds, you could candidate for AfD the articles about the various religions and have all God-theories in one "Religion" article. (Besides, personally, so far I have seen more science in the so-called "conspiracy theories" than in the official report about 9/11.) PizzaMargherita 17:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I am not. It should be about science and yet some are striving to increase their political voice by spamming the encyclopedia with dozens of articles that are not independant scientifically, politically or religiously.
 * strong keep is this not vandalism? --Striver 15:09, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You raise an interesting point. PizzaMargherita 16:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Who is the vandal? Where is the vandalism? --Tbeatty 17:17, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Well... the nom has vandalized 9/11 conspiracy related articles before --TBC TaLk?!? 20:14, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Let's merge them into one article and save him some time.--Tbeatty 23:17, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * This has nothing to do with Morton's vandalism. PizzaMargherita 06:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No, making twelve pages on Alex Jones is not vandalism. Just excessive enthusiasm. Tom Harrison Talk 19:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per rootology, PizzaMargherita. CindyLooWho 16:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * New account.--Tbeatty 17:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Provide evidence, else AGF. PizzaMargherita 17:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Provide evidence that they are a new account? They have less than 50 edits and established 5 days ago.  Pointing out they are a new account is not a negative thing.  This is not a vote and new accounts may be discounted when determing consensus. --Tbeatty 17:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you please point me to where it says that new accounts' [opinions] may be discounted? I must have missed it, thanks. [moving the rest of this thread to Suspected sock puppets/CindyLooWho]. PizzaMargherita 19:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Not surprised you missed it. Here's the template that is often applied.  --Tbeatty 22:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Tbeatty. Tom Harrison Talk 19:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep theories on 9/11 are very interesting, this article is extremely informative! --Frogsprog 20:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge as per Tbeatty ♥ FaerieInGrey 22:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge There really isn't that much information in the article when you cut out the massive quotes section, which strike me as excessive and an attempt to convince, rather than inform. Sxeptomaniac 23:50, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not remotely signifigant.  Rmt2m 00:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge as per Sxeptomaniac Ergative rlt 02:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Tbeatty, but Keep this article. Derex 04:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Nice personal attack. --Tbeatty 01:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Those long quotes are unencyclopedic, as per Sxeptomaniac, and should be deleted or moved to Robert M. Bowman and William Rodriguez (or to Wikiquote?). The remaining content will make an unremarkable single paragraph and should be merged as per Tbeatty. CWC (talk) 14:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep per rootology on this one. Well-covered crank gatherings are worth including. --badlydrawnjeff talk 10:59, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Adds little to wikipedia. Kim FOR sure 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Media coverage seems sufficient. Gamaliel 16:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Sam 21:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a meeting that happened, even if the things said in the meeting were factually erronous.
 * Delete not notable, possibly merge into "truth" movement article--Peephole 00:21, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. notable and a key event in the history of the 9/11 Truth Movement. The info on here cannot possibly fit onto the truth movement page. bov 00:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge with 9/11 Truth Movement. If this gets an entry, then my birthday party gets one too. Pacific Coast Highway {blah • I'm a hot toe picker • WP:NYCS} 02:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC) '
 * Delete per TBeatty --Mmx1 03:33, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge-this info needs to be on Wikipedia somewhere, but probably doesn't justify having its own article. Jaganath 09:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * 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.