RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation

Not to be confused with the Chicken coop.

Moderator noticeboard Welcome, BoN Use this talk page to contact the mods and report behavioral problems. The RationalWiki moderators are: Bongolian • CorruptUser • Techpriest • Plutocow • Spud • KarmaPolice

Archives for this page

Articles for deletion...

To whit; 'Balanced Budget Amendment'

Noted this last night [some 22:00 BST] on way home from work. Came on now to reply on this, discovered it had already been ended.

Whoever closed it - I accuse you doing it too quickly.

I also believe there should be a minimum amount of hours an AFD should be open before it is closed. KarmaPolice (talk) 13:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I think the Balanced Budget Amendment is missional, though the article as it existed… well, I'm not that well-informed on the subject, so I had no reason to disagree with the "Delete" votes stating that the article as written was a misrepresentation in need of a complete rewrite. --Luigifan18 (talk) 15:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

What I thought about it [chances are, my reply would have been as big as Gee's] is irrelevant because I didn't get the chance to say anything! Plus, what I said might have even swayed a vote or two [it has in the past]. KarmaPolice (talk) 16:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

I wasn't even aware it was up for a vote. Minimum time for a deletion vote might be a good idea. I'm not sure it would have saved this page though due to its stubbiness. Bongolian (talk) 17:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

While we're at it, I also think we should put in a quorum. KarmaPolice (talk) 17:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

How about we keep them open either for a week or until there is a difference of 7 votes either for keep or delete, what happens first? Also maybe we should consider some criteria for speedy deletion. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Good idea. I'm now remembering the VenomFangX AFD that was open for a really long time… --Luigifan18 (talk) 20:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Maybe those would be good limits, I'm pretty neutral on the specifics. On speedy deletion, I think it boils down to, if it would have been fine to just delete a page without holding a vote, then there's no reason to drag it out with a vote. That could go for hopelessly tiny stubs, hopelessly off-mission, spam, vandalism, etc., the pages usually deleted with no controversy. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 13:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ We could reopen the vote? Carthage (talk) 13:15, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

My position is, if an article that was previously spared AfD can be nominated again, there's no reason why an article that was previously deleted can't be given a second chance if it's improved; in fact I have recreated a couple of deleted articles like Fun:Guam. I would have no objection to someone working on this in draftspace or similar. Plutocow (talk) 18:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

That article was, as I argued on the Afd page, beyond redemption, so it would be better to wp:TNT it instead of ressurrect it IMO. That being said, you said yourself that you don't know anything about the subject, so I sincerely think you shouldn't do it yourself. There's also the missionality issue. As I said, even if the article was better, I doubt it would have much space here. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 18:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Where in my text does it state that I would be the one to reopen the vote? I was curious to hear what KP had to say, and clearly there is a simple solution to this issue given that KP is complaining that the vote was closed too early. Carthage (talk) 18:55, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Well, you asked if we could reopen the vote, so I thought you were interested at keeping the article. As far as I understand, this thread is more about creating general rules, not about this specific case. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 18:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I complained because I suspect something may have been something worth out of it - that is, if I'd been able to read through it properly. I am currently pre-drafting a RW article on 'Austerity' which can be seen as a real-life attempt doing a 'balanced budget amendment' - for example, in the UK the Chancellor Osborne talked about getting rid of the 'structural deficit' within five years and getting the debt/GDP ratio declining by the end of the decade, as well as examples of say, Greece, Spain etc. I also have a lot more cynicism regarding 'monetary policy' being effective [also is not a real option for example, nations in the Eurozone] than Gee does. Lastly, I vaguely recall the article in question not really noticing the political side of such a policy - the desire was clearly a chronic 'starve the beast' [to death, really; play any 'balance the budget' simulator - I managed it but only by axing Medicaid, the ACA, diability benefits, SNAP, free school meals, HUD housing, colleges, all cultural/art/non-school educational programmes and the elimiation of tax refunds to the poor] but any surplus will immediately be earmarked for tax cuts. KarmaPolice (talk) 19:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)