Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denialism (2nd nomination)
While about 20% of the editors expressing opinion here are for "delete" (9/45 by my count) the proportion of text arguing for "delete" is much higher - at a guess about 40%. This is largely because of a couple of editors (particularly, but not only, Unomi) repeating the same arguments over and over again, continually saying "" and "there are no sources", apparently oblivious of the sources which have been given and the answers given to , that is to say playing . I should say that this is a first class example of denialism, and an excellent illustration that the concept does exist. What a pity that this Wikipedia discussion is not a reliable source
— User:JamesBWatson, 09:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:NEO||WP:NEO||WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT (Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary)