Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Votescam


 * 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 delete. ‑Scottywong | gab _ 16:09, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Votescam

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a very strange article about a book that might be notable. However although there may be multiple and probably independent sources, I’m seriously doubtful about their reliability.

For the most part the article appears to summarise the content of the book, but then veers into what seems to be original research with a blow by blow account of phone calls made after the book’s authors were dead.

The sourcing is mostly to a single publication, ‘Hidden History’  which looks to me like a collection of conspiracy theories. I can’t see the Gore Vidal citation or the Miami Herald one, though the date of the MH ref indicates that the piece was written nearly a decade before the book was published. The ‘Grand Theft 2000’ source is only a passing ref.

Turning to the talk page I see a long explanation from another editor about Alex Jones’ interest in the book and how we shouldn’t expect to see many mainstream sources because the MSM are part of the conspiracy ‘and therefore, other Wikipedia editors working for the corrupt groups involved will see fit to suppress knowledge of this book.’

I hope my cheque is in the post. Mccapra (talk) 08:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 08:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 08:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete, does not meet WP:NBOOK, have been unable to find reviews in reliable sources (does Hidden Histories actually discuss/review it or just summarise what is in the book?), note: I am not part of the WP/Corporate world conspiracy ...... or am I? (cue ominous music). Coolabahapple (talk) 08:09, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Neither. It devotes one word to the book, "blockbuster", then discusses the brothers and the daughter. Uncle G (talk) 01:23, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
 * thanks.Coolabahapple (talk) 07:50, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Chilling (talk) 10:42, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - lack of reviews by reliable sources means it doesn't meet WP:NBOOK. Disclaimer: I am definitely part of whatever conspiracy is being alleged here. Hugsyrup (talk) 13:07, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: For all the reasons above. Also, we need to bury the truth before the normies find out. Cosmic Sans (talk) 20:56, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. This is regurgitating conspiracy theories in Wikipedia's voice, and a single book discussing it is insufficient. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 21:00, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:NBOOK.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:20, 26 July 2019 (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.