Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denialism (2nd nomination)
It is not a coherent movement, but it is a well-defined sociological phenomenon. The use of the term with the same meaning in several contexts by disparate groups refutes , and the sourcing takes care of the rest. The general unity of the several claims and tactics used by denialists, including moving the goalposts, reversing the burden of proof, ''teach the controversy'', reliance on the Galileo Gambit and similar fallacies, citing weak, biased, or out of date evidence to say that the jury is not yet in, projective assignment of motivation, and lionizing "experts" based more on conclusions than validity of evidence, unify this as a proper encyclopedic topic. Notable examples of the concept, such as AIDS denialism, Holocaust denial, Climate change denial, ''&c.'' should of course be treated. A few more example sources covering denialism (or "trees" in the analogy above): {{ISBN|9780387794754}} ''Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy'' By Seth C. Kalichman, Nicoli Nattrass (page 9 defines denialism in general); http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1147817 Climate: Game Over by Donald Kennedy; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckn139 the EJPH article mentioned above really does bear repeating. If the title is a problem, that can be solved at Talk:Denialism. Some discussion of use as a rhetorical technique might be in order
— [[User talk:2over0|2/0]] ([[Special:Contributions/2over0|cont.]]), 06:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NEO (Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary)