Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denialism (2nd nomination)
First, let me confess that the current article is ''much'' better than I remember when I looked at it a few years ago.  That said, there is still a fundamental  issue here coupled to a subtle bit of synthesis.  The modern concept of "denialism" is a neologism.  Like many neologisms it has older roots in the history of Holocaust denial, which spread to aboriginal denial, then AIDS denial, climate change denial, etc.  The scope of things that "denial" gets tacked on to has expanded rapidly in just the last 15 years (since AIDS denial became common), and with it there has grown an emerging new concept of "denialism".  But the core issue is that the terms themselves are in flux.  Gather ten experts and ask them what "denialism" is, and I'm sure you get 10 different answers with varying ranges and scopes.  That's the core of the neologism problem.  "Denialism" itself is a fuzzy concept that isn't easily pinned down and is entirely absent from nearly all dictionaries.  The article, as currently constructed, tries to pin it down, and that's the origin of the Synth problem.  The editors select and interpret sources to promote a particular interpretation of what "denialism" is.  Yes, they can find people to agree with them, but it fails to consider other points of view that would disagree about what "denialism" means.  For example, go back 15 years when the number of accepted "X denial" concepts was much narrower and the historical scope of these terms would seem considerably different.  Whether intentionally or unintentionally, I think this is a case where Wikipedia is being used to shape the meaning of "denialism" rather than merely document its meaning, which isn't appropriate for a reference work.  Given that, I feel it is premature for Wikipedia to have an article on "denialism", and we are better off without it
— User:Dragons, 04:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NEO (Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary)