Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:07, 17 December 2022

December 15, 2022 Twitter suspensions

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Misplaced Pages contributors. Misplaced Pages has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

December 15, 2022 Twitter suspensions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:10YT, WP:PAGEDECIDE, WP:NOTDIARY etc. this should be a single sentence on the Misplaced Pages page of Twitter or so rather than a bloated mess based on "breaking news" articles. TryKid  20:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Delete these Twitter accounts getting suspended does not deserve its own seperate article. BlueShirtz (talk) 20:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Must be deleted. Who ever wrote that aarticle musst be banned from Misplaced Pages. 2A02:C7C:4C00:CE00:B06B:A95C:817E:9E44 (talk) 20:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Agree, the page is a leftist joke. 2603:8000:2D01:579E:E1D1:EB7F:F596:FA6A (talk) 20:57, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  The central part of the story is whether or not there was wrong-doing associated with the suspensions (is this action journalism or doxxing). That topic is not covered.

  The responses from other commentators section is heavily weighted in favor of those who were suspended. No comments supportive of the doxxing suspensions are listed. 2604:61C0:500:8D60:510B:1A10:7A89:2F4 (talk) 21:04, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Keep - Disagree with this AfD nomination. This is about more than just some random account suspensions, and can't be summarized in a single sentence. The Thursday Night Massacre involves free speech issues, Elon Musks' relationship to journalists and the political system, social media moderation ethics, etc. The story is also still ongoing. Important enough to keep for now and wait and see how the story evolves, and what the lasting impact and importance is. Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 20:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  They've all been reinstated. Why weren't mass permanent suspensions of high-profile conservative accounts given its own separate article? 175.136.139.226 (talk) 20:48, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Would you please reference which conservative accounts you are talking about? What were the grounds for suspension in these cases? Some specifics would be useful. Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 20:50, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  I mean, Trump doesn't have his own article. And his suspension was commented on by many heads of states around the world. 175.136.139.226 (talk) 21:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Much of that is contained in Social media use by Donald Trump. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:04, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  His suspension does not have a singular, separate article, even though it was important enough for many heads of states to comment on it specifically. 175.136.139.226 (talk) 21:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Move or Redirect Tons of high-profile social media accounts, most notably conservatives, have been suspended in the past few years. No seperate articles for these because WP:NOTNEWS. Move it to Twitter, or the Acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk article. 191.54.178.56 (talk) 20:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - oh for fick’s sake, if “Twitter files” deserves an article then so does this. Probably even more. Volunteer Marek 20:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  And btw, kudos to whoever wrote this fairly impressive article in such a short amount of time. Volunteer Marek 20:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  in response to this and the first IP above. cf Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Paul Gosar Twitter video incident. If there is a "need to see" whether this will have any lasting impact, that just means there's no lasting impact visible right now. and so, no need for a separate article. if it does turn out to be independently notable in the future, the page can always be excavated from the history. as for Twitter Files, while I personally don't agree these are similar, the policy WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS—feel free to AfD that too. TryKid  20:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  There clearly is visible impact right now though. Several interviews with journalists have discussed a chilling effect on free speech. Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 20:53, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Twitter files has sustained coverage. It takes a crystal ball to determine if this will. schetm (talk) 20:50, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Not really. It has sustained coverage among crazy people. This is obvious much bigger if for no other reason than the fact that the people that got banned get to write stories about it in major outlets. Volunteer Marek 20:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Politico, New York Times, NPR, New York Magazine, etc. Yup, only crazy people have provided sustained coverage of Twitter Files. schetm (talk) 20:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Try hiding your bias. 175.136.139.226 (talk) 21:03, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Comment I believe internal documents regarding actual administrative decisions are markedly more important than some suspensions. Misplaced Pages is (whether intentional or not) blowing the issue way out of proportion, as are other news media sites. 108.51.103.205 (talk) 20:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Coordinated attacks on journalists (changing the rules to make them in breach of sharing...publicly available information) and consequently also the foundations of democracy on a major global platform seems to be....important enough to talk about. 69.159.86.214 (talk) 20:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Coordinated attacks? This entire event was just Musk having an outburst. As of right now, both Spaces(which were removed ostensibly because he was being criticized in them) and the accounts have been restored. In two weeks people will have moved on. 108.51.103.205 (talk) 21:01, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  All the accounts have been reinstated. What are you on about? 175.136.139.226 (talk) 21:04, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  On one hand, we get to see exactly how top-level executives of a large social media platform deliberate content moderation, that also their interactions with government officials and bodies. The public has never seen such detail of this context ever. On the other hand, temp suspensions that are attributable to extreme incompetence; the kind of mass suspensions we've seen Twitter do pre- and post-Elon. Explain how the latter is more important than the former. 175.136.139.226 (talk) 20:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Keep, appears to be distinct enough from Twitter Files and clearly has a lot of coverage. This may need reconsidering in a few years, WP:10YEARS. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
• Speedy delete. Self-promotion for a group of non-notable journalists trying to turn themselves into a story. No one will remember this in a week.Pinchofhope (talk) 20:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

There’s obviously enough reliable sources in the article *right now* (more will probably be added over time) to falsify your crystal-ballin’ Volunteer Marek 20:57, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Watch out there. It's going to have to meet WP:GCSD or WP:ACSD. I think you meant strong delete? Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

yes change that to Strong delete. Pinchofhope (talk) 21:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Btw, this is article/AfD is all over twitter, Musk amplified it (called Misplaced Pages “controlled by MSM”) so expect a lot of crazy in the next 24 hours here. Volunteer Marek 20:57, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Non-notable? Then why do some of them have their own Misplaced Pages pages? Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 20:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  And yet here all of you first-time wiki editors are appearing to insist it's not important enough to have a page. If it wasn't important, you wouldn't be so vehemently opposed. 69.159.86.214 (talk) 20:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Prove that this article conveys anything of substance. To mee this just seems like WP:NOTNEWS 108.51.103.205 (talk) 20:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Delete, this article is disproportionate left-wing activism. This topic should be at most a subsection in Twitter's article. Twitter suspensions occur ramapantly for years, including many accounts of sitting officials in multiple countries. Fbergo (talk) 20:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Lol, “I think this article is left wing activism (sic)” wtf that is suppose to be, is not a valid reason for deletion. Come on. You’ve been here ostensibly since 2005. You should know that. Volunteer Marek 20:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

WP:NOTACTIVISM? Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, please actually read the bulletin points in that and then also realize that this has nothing to do with notability. You can’t just say “I think this is activism!” without substantiating it and expect to be taken seriously. Volunteer Marek 21:07, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Keep, at least for now. I'm not aware of previous instances involving notable journalists and rival social media sites being banned in such a manner. It also seems to be notable and well-reported-on as per WP:GNG. I do agree that a merge or deletion may be necessary eventually (or an extension of this page to any potential fallout of this situation), but for now this is a rapidly evolving situation and we shouldn't take such an action yet.Aveaoz (talk) 20:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
• Merge into Twitter suspensions. WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOPAGE applies. It's too soon to determine whether or not this will have "enduring in-depth coverage," and there's nothing in this article that doesn't belong in Twitter suspensions. schetm (talk) 20:57, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Disagree on WP:NOTNEWS. Page contains sufficient reliable sources, involves people notable enough to have Misplaced Pages articles, and does not involve "celebrity gossip". Aveaoz (talk) 21:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Merge or Redirect This event was overall very quickly resolved and is of questionable significance. This further leads to at best questionable relevance as a stand-alone article. Agree this could be better placed in condensed form in a section on an already extant article that already discusses Musk's taking over of Twitter. KNorth192 (talk) 20:57, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Either Keep or Merge into an overall article about Musk's handling of twitter since his takeover. May or may not be notable enough for a whole article, but definitly requires extended coverage in some form somewhere. However, may develop more to the extent that it warrants its own article. Jspace727 (talk) 21:01, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
• Merge into Twitter#Acquisition_by_Elon_Musk. I think this is an excellent example of WP:RECENT and WP:TOOSOON. This needs long term support in reliable sources before it is notable enough for inclusion. Esolo5002 (talk) 21:04, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
• Delete, they had their bans removed within two days anyways. There has been other mass suspensions which do not have their own Misplaced Pages articles such as those on January 8th and the two months following. FoxTech20 (talk) 21:07, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Web or Internet)
• AfD debates