Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gaslighting Government

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gaslighting Government

Gaslighting Government (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article which is written like an original research essay about a neologistic theory rather than a properly encyclopedic article about a well-studied or well-documented thing. The only properly footnoted reference here is a mere definition of the general concept of gaslighting -- instead, the external links section contains a linkfarm of sources which use the word gaslighting in a political context (almost entirely in relation to Just You Guess Who), but the only one that presumes to define "gaslighting government" as a concept is a YouTube video. All of which means the sources here are being used to synthesize an original research concept, rather than properly supporting or analyzing this as a thing in its own right. Bearcat (talk) 19:27, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Every morning (there's a halo...) 20:27, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- Original research is right. We already have an article of gaslighting which in modern political context is a term used to try to shut down a debate.--Rusf10 (talk) 01:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. OR/Essay. One ref which links to gaslighting in general not the political kind. Szzuk (talk) 19:35, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Sole source is about the term in general. PhilKnight (talk) 23:32, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.