Gang Stalking ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( restore)

I'd like to redirect Gang Stalking to Cause stalking, which was just created. One of the sources for the article mentions that Cause Stalking is sometimes called Gang Stalking.

Note that two previous deletions are from editors who are now gone, Tom harrison (left in a huff) and Altenmann (banned). Jeremystalked _{T C} 03:24, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply

• It is difficult to find any WP:RS to back up the assertions that this is an objective phenomenon, rather than a belief system. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cause stalking, for verifiability problems relating to this article, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cause stalking for past history. If the author wishes to create an article about people's belief that they are being stalked by shadowy conspiracies, it should be created at gang stalking: see the discussion at Talk:gang stalking for suitable verifiable mainstream references to the existence of belief in this phenomenon. -- The Anome ( talk) 12:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
• Talk:Gang stalking no longer visible but in principle I support keeping "gang stalking" as a belief system.-- Penbat ( talk) 16:13, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
• Support creation of protected redirects of Gang stalking/ Gang Stalking to Cause stalking per reasonable nom and assuming the accuracy of the first sentence of Cause stalking, that the terms are recorded as being used synonymously. Protected redirects are less of a problem than salted pages. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 20:42, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
  • FYI that part of the first sentence was referenced to a single source which has been removed due to the source not being reliable, so asssumign the accuracy maybe a stretch -- 82.7.40.7 ( talk) 07:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
• I find it peculiar that the Anome uses the term phenomenon, modern usage defined as an extraordinary occurance, when in the real cases where it does happen this is simply no different from Scapegoating a well known societal practice since biblical times. Neither do sociologists dispute the problem of Workplace bullying or mobbing and it is disingenuous to assume something well known to occur in the social setting of the workplace would also not be likely to be happening in the social setting of the neighborhood or community. When the whistle blows and people punch the clock, the propensity for ugliness in humanity does not shut down.

  If any controversy should exist it may be for several reasons, one of which is the use of new terminology to describe what the wiki articles above confirm has been around for many years. Secondly, and this addresses his comments about it being a belief, not real, the internet has made it possible for those with genuine mental issues to network. Many with persecutory delusional syndrome lead normal lives yet cannot get validation of their beliefs through family and friends but see the accounts of these cases online, adopt them as their own and even create a culture of codependence on others on the internet.

  However this is a separate issue and should not diminish the existence of what appears to be a societal issue of a cyclical nature inherent to many societies in history.

  I tend to be rather long winded in my comments, I apologize for that, and will summarize the point that several wiki pages exist with a near identical "phenomenon" that aren't seeing doubt injected, if the concern is that it's a mental illness perhaps individuals who believe a well known real problem is solely a delusion should focus their editing attention toward the appropriate pages of the mental illness catagories. Batvette ( talk) 06:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply

  • Just to be clear, perhaps I should have said "alleged phenomenon" -- I hope it's clear that I do not believe there is any evidence that meets WP:RS/ WP:V that this alleged phenomenon actually exists in the real world. -- The Anome ( talk) 06:21, 2 August 2010 (UTC) reply
• Start over From the AfD discussion, there seemed to be no agreement on the scope of the article; whether it should be about real cases, or fringe. As I see it, they;re both valid subjects. If anyone does a decent article, then we can put one into mainspace. Considering some of the discussion, I think they ought to show it here first; it will decrease subsequent difficulties. DGG ( talk ) 23:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC) reply