Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RationalWiki (3rd nomination)
to Conservapedia#RationalWiki per nom's thorough ,  and .  I also did an independent search for sources, and was actually ''really surprised'' that I didn't find ''anything'' meaty.  The American Thinker piece is the best, but it's a blog post responding to a provocation.  In the LA Times and Register pieces, it's a footnote in articles that are really about Conservipedia.  They're also really only one source, since Register article is mostly quoting and summarizing the LA Times with an extra layer of its characteristic snark.  The rest are blog posts and articles that just mention it briefly -- almost as if were just something random that popped up on a web search (which exactly how I'm aware of it).  I don't think it meets the threshold for a standalone article
— User:GretLomborg, 21:34, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Stance: merge
Cited policy: WP:BEFORE||WP:WEBCRIT||WP:INHERITWEB (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion)