- 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. WP:SNOW j⚛e decker talk 22:54, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Targeted Individual
AfDs for this article:
- Targeted Individual ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Lack of notability. There doesn't seem to be many reliable sources mentioning this term. AfD of same article title in february 2013. This article seems to be very similar and should maybe be speedied per WP:G4 if it's a near copy of the deleted article. Sjö ( talk) 18:16, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete, and salt. I can't judge whether this is a qualifying G4, but I can see that the arguments from the 2013 AFD still clearly apply to this content. And I can see that the arguments from the other, older AFDs on related topics (linked from the first AFD) also still apply. In short, similar conspiracy-theory-styled material has appeared at gang stalking, cause stalking, and a host of other article titles, dating back to perhaps 2005 in one form or another, and has never survived a deletion review. Several such titles saw G4-deleted recreations post-AFD, and at least two of the titles converted to redirects have had to be protected in that form. Squeamish Ossifrage ( talk) 18:59, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep This might be merged with the similar topic of electronic harassment, though that is just a subset of this topic. There are have been a few mainstream domestic terrorist incidents connected with this conspiracy theory, though media sources are split as to whether the attacks are real, a sign of mental illness, or a connection back to disinformation agents who use the theory as a cover story for the true motives for such attacks. Aaron Alexis was determined by the FBI to suffer from TI delusions, and so has been well covered by the mainstream press, even though the topic has also been promoted by conspiracy theory oriented press. Even if this is just unreliable conspiracy theories, it appears often enough to be treated at least in the spirit of other conspiracy theories such as Sandy Hook and the 911 attacks. If you search for the term on the internet, it occurs often enough that people will want to go Wikipedia to find a definition and make their own judgement of which side they want to believe. But to say the concept simply does not exist does not help anybody Bachcell ( talk) 19:22, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
keepdelete This article convinced me that the is a new dimension of paranoia, beyond "just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you". Staszek Lem ( talk) 20:14, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- We have some (appropriately limited) coverage of this at
Stalking#False claims of stalking, "gang stalking" and delusions of persecution. I don't see any reason why we should have an stand-alone article couched in the terms of the conspiracy, and
WP:FRINGE suggests that we should not.
Squeamish Ossifrage (
talk) 20:55, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- In this case, a redirect might be a solution. Staszek Lem ( talk) 01:24, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- P.S. After re-reading the article I see nothing salvageable on the subject beyond recapitulating already existing articles about some crazies. Staszek Lem ( talk) 01:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- We have some (appropriately limited) coverage of this at
Stalking#False claims of stalking, "gang stalking" and delusions of persecution. I don't see any reason why we should have an stand-alone article couched in the terms of the conspiracy, and
WP:FRINGE suggests that we should not.
Squeamish Ossifrage (
talk) 20:55, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete I went through several of the links and they certainly all relate to topics, but not to this topic...because it seems this article is the only one about this topic. Wikipedia is not the place to create a synthesis of ideas based on various information and present it as an existing thing. Delete per WP:OR and lack of direct citation/verifiability. - Markeer 03:56, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Rcsprinter123 (shout) @ 18:36, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Rcsprinter123 (gossip) @ 18:36, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment The books about the topic may be sufficent to establish notability. 84.106.11.117 ( talk) 19:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Reply Can you give an example of one of these books? The problem with the article is that all of the books linked as citations are NOT about this topic, they're about other topics. - Markeer 00:36, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete; synthesis of notions that have no place on wikipedia. bobrayner ( talk) 20:25, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete and salt. Promotion of fringe conspiracy bollocks based on synthesis. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 01:04, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete No coverage of this topic in reliable sources, passing mention of it only. No serious discussion or substantial coverage required for notability. Existing content is SYNTH. - - MrBill3 ( talk) 06:25, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - i was going to weigh in on this article before. but i see that everyone else have said what i had in mind.-- BabbaQ ( talk) 18:46, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete This is a WP:FRINGE POV fork -- a WP:SYNTH WP:SOAPBOX version of an existing article. - LuckyLouie ( talk) 13:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete as fringe-fork of existing articles on stalking, etc. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:45, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete One of the most stupendous examples of synthesis and OR I've ever seen. Wholly inappropriate for the encyclopedia. § FreeRangeFrog croak 18:05, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete as per previous comments. Mostly fringe synthesis. Also, English in lede is not good. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:08, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete- conspiracy theorist drivel. Reyk YO! 19:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - appears to be a conspiracy theory. (Arguments already stated) -- Orduin ⋠ T⋡ 19:11, 20 January 2015 (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.
- 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. WP:SNOW j⚛e decker talk 22:54, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Targeted Individual
AfDs for this article:
- Targeted Individual ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Lack of notability. There doesn't seem to be many reliable sources mentioning this term. AfD of same article title in february 2013. This article seems to be very similar and should maybe be speedied per WP:G4 if it's a near copy of the deleted article. Sjö ( talk) 18:16, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete, and salt. I can't judge whether this is a qualifying G4, but I can see that the arguments from the 2013 AFD still clearly apply to this content. And I can see that the arguments from the other, older AFDs on related topics (linked from the first AFD) also still apply. In short, similar conspiracy-theory-styled material has appeared at gang stalking, cause stalking, and a host of other article titles, dating back to perhaps 2005 in one form or another, and has never survived a deletion review. Several such titles saw G4-deleted recreations post-AFD, and at least two of the titles converted to redirects have had to be protected in that form. Squeamish Ossifrage ( talk) 18:59, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep This might be merged with the similar topic of electronic harassment, though that is just a subset of this topic. There are have been a few mainstream domestic terrorist incidents connected with this conspiracy theory, though media sources are split as to whether the attacks are real, a sign of mental illness, or a connection back to disinformation agents who use the theory as a cover story for the true motives for such attacks. Aaron Alexis was determined by the FBI to suffer from TI delusions, and so has been well covered by the mainstream press, even though the topic has also been promoted by conspiracy theory oriented press. Even if this is just unreliable conspiracy theories, it appears often enough to be treated at least in the spirit of other conspiracy theories such as Sandy Hook and the 911 attacks. If you search for the term on the internet, it occurs often enough that people will want to go Wikipedia to find a definition and make their own judgement of which side they want to believe. But to say the concept simply does not exist does not help anybody Bachcell ( talk) 19:22, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
keepdelete This article convinced me that the is a new dimension of paranoia, beyond "just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you". Staszek Lem ( talk) 20:14, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- We have some (appropriately limited) coverage of this at
Stalking#False claims of stalking, "gang stalking" and delusions of persecution. I don't see any reason why we should have an stand-alone article couched in the terms of the conspiracy, and
WP:FRINGE suggests that we should not.
Squeamish Ossifrage (
talk) 20:55, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- In this case, a redirect might be a solution. Staszek Lem ( talk) 01:24, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- P.S. After re-reading the article I see nothing salvageable on the subject beyond recapitulating already existing articles about some crazies. Staszek Lem ( talk) 01:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- We have some (appropriately limited) coverage of this at
Stalking#False claims of stalking, "gang stalking" and delusions of persecution. I don't see any reason why we should have an stand-alone article couched in the terms of the conspiracy, and
WP:FRINGE suggests that we should not.
Squeamish Ossifrage (
talk) 20:55, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete I went through several of the links and they certainly all relate to topics, but not to this topic...because it seems this article is the only one about this topic. Wikipedia is not the place to create a synthesis of ideas based on various information and present it as an existing thing. Delete per WP:OR and lack of direct citation/verifiability. - Markeer 03:56, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Rcsprinter123 (shout) @ 18:36, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Rcsprinter123 (gossip) @ 18:36, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment The books about the topic may be sufficent to establish notability. 84.106.11.117 ( talk) 19:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Reply Can you give an example of one of these books? The problem with the article is that all of the books linked as citations are NOT about this topic, they're about other topics. - Markeer 00:36, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete; synthesis of notions that have no place on wikipedia. bobrayner ( talk) 20:25, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete and salt. Promotion of fringe conspiracy bollocks based on synthesis. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 01:04, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete No coverage of this topic in reliable sources, passing mention of it only. No serious discussion or substantial coverage required for notability. Existing content is SYNTH. - - MrBill3 ( talk) 06:25, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - i was going to weigh in on this article before. but i see that everyone else have said what i had in mind.-- BabbaQ ( talk) 18:46, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete This is a WP:FRINGE POV fork -- a WP:SYNTH WP:SOAPBOX version of an existing article. - LuckyLouie ( talk) 13:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete as fringe-fork of existing articles on stalking, etc. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:45, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete One of the most stupendous examples of synthesis and OR I've ever seen. Wholly inappropriate for the encyclopedia. § FreeRangeFrog croak 18:05, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete as per previous comments. Mostly fringe synthesis. Also, English in lede is not good. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:08, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete- conspiracy theorist drivel. Reyk YO! 19:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - appears to be a conspiracy theory. (Arguments already stated) -- Orduin ⋠ T⋡ 19:11, 20 January 2015 (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.