Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Rational Response Squad

Wow, how extremely dishonest and without proof that sockpuppet claim was. This deletion process can be explained in nothing more than "willful ignorance" on the part of the people voting to delete. We heard claims of "non-notability" meanwhile tons of "keeps" were removed by someone claiming non-notability. Did you think to yourself as you were deleting, I'm going to delete the evidence of notability before I claim non-notability? Really explain the thought process there.

Additionally the final "speedy deletion" was put up after tons of "keep" support showed up with an outright lie that there was sock puppetry involved. Oh yeah? PROVE IT you fraud! The Rational Response Squad has over 20,000 supporters, fans, and listeners, and is downloaded thousands of times each month. It's one of the highest listened to shows on internet radio, and deserves a place on wikipedia, not that they need it. There was tons of outcry for conforming the page to wikipedia guidelines and instead we see a speedy deletion and a restriction on new users abillity to post. Restricting new users all while calling it non-notable is effectively telling any of the people that can vauge for it's notability to shut up because they don't matter. Sort of like "tell a lie over and over and it eventually becomes true." Well it didn't become true, RRS is notable, like it or not. I dare any one of you "deleters" to challenge the RRS to a debate on their board. Go ahead, see how non-notable they are. --Infidelaholic 19:25, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Just because you have 20,000 people on your myspace friend's list does not make you encylopedia worthy. It is not one of the highest listened to radio shows, it is not even in the top 1,000 probably, that doesn't matter. This sorta stuff must happen all the time on Wikipedia, especially if you are using your "20,000" members on your friend's list to rally support from anonymous posters. "Challenge the RRS to a debate?" -And you wonder why this got deleted? I'm sure they delete childish wikipedia articles from kids who are the "greatest baseball players in the world" and what do these kids retort with? - They retort with, "I challenge anyone of you to a baseball game!" Grow up. GravityExNihilo 07:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Deleters, I ask you, why do you want this deleted? I figure you want something to test your faith, show your truist resolve. You have to over come your enemy to become stronger, not stab them in the back, that takes no strength and it makes your relgion(s) look like they resort to underhand dirty tatics. I say take their knowledge and try to use it againest them, not shuffle it under the rug because you beileves its wrong. You cant defend your relgion if you have nothing to fight for it. You cant prove me and the 100 other atheists wrong by just making our works dirty litte secrets. You have to take our knowledge, find its flaws, use them againest us, then you can with right claim you are a proud representive of your relgion. Taking out want people dont want to hear is borderline communisim.

Even if you delete it. one will rise to its place, you cant silence protest if they protesters are stern and determinated in their beilefs. Their will always be atheists and we are steadily growing in number, it may be a couple of years or 100 but we will have a voice that one day will have to be acknowledged.

The RRS has proved it legitimacy and has had some people reknown in their fields. Sam Harris, who wrote two books that i know of that won recongantion and has degrees in his field. He cant truly be just some atheist blabber. They also give the floor to Christians when they let a representive of the christian relgion, Ray Hope, on the show and defend himself and his faith. Besides, if theirs any pages you should be looking at, its the pages on sexual terms and phrases, i assure you, they are 3x as needing ridcule.

--Endless13October 15, 2006(WWW.MYSPACE.COM/SNUBBIRTH13)

By the way, it is not atheism under attack here, you cannot use that as a blanket as the race card or gender card is used. Nobody here is attacking atheism, or free speech, and I am quite sure wikipedia is academic and free-speechworty enough to let my argument go unfounded.

And every coffee shop William Shatner ever walked in deserves a place on Wikipedia? If you really want to know what the MySpace atheist community has to say about the RRS, go ahead and ask, http://forum.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=messageboard.viewThread&entryID=24563021&categoryID=0&IsSticky=0&groupID=100002606&Mytoken=1D1F81BF-CADC-4758-855300FBC2F1AB0C77028380

or

http://forum.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=messageboard.viewThread&entryID=24898026&categoryID=0&IsSticky=0&groupID=100002606&Mytoken=F8EF32BE-94F4-41E4-9AF69D217750376477095732

- I apologize if it is not very wikipedialike to post this in a discussion page, I figure we can take some of the bickering out of here and put it over there, where it probably belongs.75.18.189.236 06:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I've added some screenshots that might concern some of you: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v111/stabby1/rrs1.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v111/stabby1/rrs2.jpg

It appears you guys were correct, they were rallying up a vote.GravityExNihilo 06:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)