Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/If It Ain't Got That Swing

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 keep. Tone 13:51, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If It Ain't Got That Swing[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:G5 (article author is blocked sock of editor topic banned from editing articles containing political or religious biographical information) as there are no other contributions, except technical fixes. wumbolo ^^^ 15:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Clearly passes GNG with abundant coverage in reliable sources. This article really isn't about politics anyway, so it wasn't even created in violation of the ban. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 15:37, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The book documents the author's shift from liberalism to support of right-wing politics. How is it not about politics? wumbolo ^^^ 15:41, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is about one author's opinion. He is not a well-known commentator nor a key figure in politics. It's a bit of a stretch. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 16:25, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:05, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:05, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the editor whose signature reads "EDDY" and per the argument advanced in this edit. Satisfies GNG and NBOOK. James500 (talk) 04:51, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: If the article met the G5 CSD, it would have been tagged with {{db-g5}} and we wouldn't be having this discussion. Otherwise, the article has no obvious causes for deletion, nor has the nominator provided one. — fourthords | =Λ= | 16:16, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong. If G5 is borderline, we don't tag it. I provided a perfectly valid cause for deletion, and nominated it here because it's not exactly clear. If I tagged it with G5, admins would hate me for not being careful, and now that I am being careful, people like you vote keep just for the sake of it. wumbolo ^^^ 17:12, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you mean by "borderline": either a banned editor created the page, or they didn't. I can't imagine anyone hating you for any legitimate editing, but it's your prerogative. As for vot[ing] keep just for the sake of it: (a) please assume good faith on the part of other editors, and (b) this is a discussion, not a vote. Aside from a G5-CSD with which you're afraid to tag the article, do you have any arguments for its deletion? — fourthords | =Λ= | 19:01, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop trolling. I have tried tagging for speedy deletion, but that ended up with me (and sometimes other editors) being harassed by the banned users. Now I can't even go to AfD without being criticized for going to AfD. Next time, I will tag with G5, and go to ANI if it's contested. Consider this my last reply to this thread. wumbolo ^^^ 15:44, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've replied to Wumbolo (talk · contribs) here. — fourthords | =Λ= | 16:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because as state above "Clearly passes GNG with abundant coverage in reliable sources."Vmavanti (talk) 00:11, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
speedy NUKE -- we should not encourage sockpupetteers work in any way. If the subject is notable, please rewrite from scratch. We must erase sockmasters from out memory/history.Staszek Lem (talk) 01:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Should we make an exception when the edits are clearly beneficial. I mean, Cirt wasn't blocked when he created the alt account, so he wan't evading a block. He was TBANned on politics pages, which was probably the impetus for the block, but as I've mentioned earlier, this article is only tangentially related to politics. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 01:46, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, we shouldn't make an exception to such a critical policy like G5. The work of socks is never welcome. wumbolo ^^^ 10:06, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.