The mental hoops some of those commenters jump through to claim it would be censorship for Wikipedia to not have a page dedicated to this is astounding.
All the 'delete' comments are just saying that the content is valid, just as a subset of a pre-existing page. Which sounds totally appropriate as the 'Twitter Files' stuff is just Twitter's outing of its own internal discussions. There's nothing new there that warrants an entirely new article.
It's not censorship to nest it inside the larger article on the laptop debacle.
But that's not how lots of people have used it there. I see your point but to quote:
"Delete I would suggest a merge"
"Delete. This is not notable enough for its own article and should be in the main Hunter Biden laptop controversy article."
"Delete - I'm also of the opinion that this could very well fit in Hunter Biden laptop controversy"
"Delete -- under the scope of the laptop article."
Perhaps the nuance here is either 1) people are idiots and meant 'merge' but said 'delete' or 2) there's no need to merge anything if it all already elsewhere, so just delete this redundant article
"merge" is basically "delete and ...", voting "delete" over "merge" doesn't mean that you think the content can't be integrated elsewhere, hence the distinction is not that important for a deletion vote.
Oh, true, I misremembered that and thought that always required extra action, but that was if you wanted part of the history wiped while preserving the page.
7 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 29.2 ms ] threadAll the 'delete' comments are just saying that the content is valid, just as a subset of a pre-existing page. Which sounds totally appropriate as the 'Twitter Files' stuff is just Twitter's outing of its own internal discussions. There's nothing new there that warrants an entirely new article.
It's not censorship to nest it inside the larger article on the laptop debacle.
But that's what "merge" means, not "delete".
"Delete I would suggest a merge"
"Delete. This is not notable enough for its own article and should be in the main Hunter Biden laptop controversy article."
"Delete - I'm also of the opinion that this could very well fit in Hunter Biden laptop controversy"
"Delete -- under the scope of the laptop article."
Perhaps the nuance here is either 1) people are idiots and meant 'merge' but said 'delete' or 2) there's no need to merge anything if it all already elsewhere, so just delete this redundant article