Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Indigo children/For Indigos

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was userfy. A condensed and neutrally phrased summary of this essay could be added as a FAQ note at the top of Talk:Indigo children. The essay itself, however, is more of a polemic against a belief than a useful editing tool. Userfication allows the opinion to continue to be presented - it is effectively "kept" in Wikipedia as a whole - but in a space appropriate for such an expression of opinion. bd2412 T 13:41, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Indigo children/For Indigos


I found this page linked from the article talk page. It is specifically directed at a particular class of believer and attempts to dissuade the reader from the belief. Clearly this is not an appropriate use of Wikipedia. Skyerise (talk) 15:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Page is meant to deal with the regular POV-pushers we get on the talk page on this WP:FRINGE topic. It is about as appropriate as having something on Talk:Vaccination explaining why we don't give credence to anti-vaccers.  This isn't article content, it's effectively a talk page post.  Do you have a policy-based reason for deleting this talk page post that you did not write?
 * If I were to copy the contents to my computer and post that boilerplate response every time someone came along arguing that we should give equal validity between the works of shysters and scientists, it would be perfectly fine. I could make a template out of it.  This was just the most efficient option.  Ian.thomson (talk) 16:04, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree with Ian.Thompson. We don't delete talk page discussions unless there is a clear BLP violation. Sundayclose (talk) 16:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * This isn't discussion. All that takes is a link into the talk archives. This is a small number of Wikipedia editors taking a position, intentionally created in the talk space even though it is not discussion. Skyerise (talk) 16:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Once again, Skyerise, you're creating your own policies. This is a subpage of the article's talk page. It could easily be moved to the main talk page, but is separate for organization and clarity. Any editor can express any opinion on a talk page. Sundayclose (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No, that's what WP:ESSAYS are for. We'll see: I doubt editors not in the "crush pseudoscience" clique will buy that argument. Skyerise (talk) 16:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, we'll see. I don't recall ever seeing an essay about one article. Sundayclose (talk) 16:22, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * By 'the "crush pseudoscience" clique', you mean any editor who follows and understands WP:NPOV and actual science? Wikipedia does not give equal validity to WP:FRINGE topics.  That is policy as written and as intended.  Wikipedia is almost required to dismiss pseudoscience by not giving it article space unless it is adequately covered by mainstream science.  If mainstream science is dismissive of the topic, so are we.  It is a perfectly legitimate use of a talk page to discourage editors from trying to promote the works of WP:Lunatic charlatans.  It is not appropriate to try and censor the talk page posts of others because they discourage delusional advocates from filling the article with their superstitious fantasies.  It is not appropriate to 'creatively interpret' existing guidelines or even cite non-existent guidelines to try and accomplish that either. Ian.thomson (talk) 16:33, 27 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - article talk pages are to be used as an aid in the development of the article. For a topic on fringe topic such as Indigo children, a sub-page to head off article objections from true believers seems to be a perfectly reasonable approach.  If you have specific objections to the way it is worded, then that should be worked out through discussion, but the purpose of the subpage is in line with policy for article talk pages. -- Whpq (talk) 18:29, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, or reformulate I'm about as skeptical as they come, and don't believe this indigo crap at all, but come on.  This is a page that basically says "we own this page, go take your POV and shove it".  Not acceptable, even if I agree with nearly everything you are saying.  Gigs (talk) 15:48, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If I saved the original post to a text file and copy-pasted it every single time someone came to the talk page complaining "Indigo Children are real, you can't scientifically test spiritual phenomena like psychic powers"... would that be a problem? Ian.thomson (talk) 19:30, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * That would be disruptive to conversation. That aside, the attitude expressed in the page in question is not appropriate to Wikipedia.   This isn't something like the appropriate little FAQ on Talk:Creationism, this is an outright assault on these Indigo believers, labeling them delusional among other things.   Gigs (talk) 20:03, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete/archive -- I was thinking "Keep but move and rewrite" but that basically amounts to delete. I can see the value in such notices or FAQ pages, but I have several problems with this one. It sounds like an essay or blog post and it's too long and too patronizing; its main purpose seems to be something other than giving people advice or answers about how to edit the article or why the article is how it is. It's not possible to rewrite that text into something appropriate. And it has to be something appropriate. Letting it stay there in its elevated status above other comments, is like we're endorsing it. I'm not. I think the content of that page can be moved to the talk page's archive. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 20:48, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * keep. not garbage, useful/usable advice. -M.Altenmann >t 14:42, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Is it Wikipedia-related advice, though? What do you think about my above^ comment? — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 14:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Move to Wikipediaspace/userspace as an essay Per comments from others about why this shouldn't be in talkspace. Brustopher (talk) 23:07, 23 July 2015 (UTC)