Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/MKNAOMI

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was

Conspiracy theory presented as fact. And not even the "facts" which much of the community I pulled up by Google claims -- that this US government office created AIDS. RickK 19:22, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)

• Brain control? MKDELTA? MKNAOMI? Most of the google hits are to Wikipedia clones (never a good sign), but [1] takes the cake. Delete net.kookery. --Ardonik.talk() 21:20, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)
• Transwiki to CIA World Factbook or redirect to Tin_foil_hat. Seriously, the black UN helicopters will be along in a while to delete this article as original research. Ianb 22:02, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• MKDELETE. Livajo 22:25, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Some...force...compels me...must fight it, must not vote delete. Geogre 00:14, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC) (but I do)
  • Better, but not as good as we'd like it, so send to Clean Up and keep. Geogre 00:43, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. This is closely related to MKULTRA, an article that is not disputed and was even recently on the Main Page. MKNAOMI is the subject of many conspiracy theories (and is probably notable for that alone) but no evidence has been presented that the content of this article represents a hoax. The article does not, for example, allege that the experiments worked. I am not arguing that we keep unverifiable garbage in the encyclopedia but I do think that there is enough circumstantial support to require more evidence than "it sounds like a hoax to me" to delete. Rossami 04:04, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • This Baltimore Sun article was the most reputable hit I found. The Baltimore Sun article corroborates elements of this article.
  • Here are a sampling of different conspiracy theories which reference the MKNAOMI. (Warning - some of them are quite entertaining - others present a disturbing view into the mind and worldview of the author): [[2]], [[3]], [[4]], [[5]], [[6]], [[7]], [[8]], [[9]], [[10]], [[11]], [[12]], [[13]].
• Delete if it stays as it is. But keep if someone can add something to put this into a context, can give some information as to where the story comes from, who tends to believe it and so on. Jallan 20:12, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete if not cleaned up. -Sean Curtin 02:59, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Agreed w/ Rossami. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:22, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Weak keep, cleanup. NPOVify? — Gwalla | Talk 22:22, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. MKNAOMI is very well-documented to have happened. The documents are available from the Library of Congress and other sources. I am sure that at least someone posted them on the internet to be linked to. Search for MKNAOMI documents. People who do not believe in mind-control research are just deluding themselves.
  • Government mind-control research? If you're serious about keeping the article, I highly suggest that you stop insulting those who doubt you, find these sources you allude to, and properly cite them in the article so that others can evaluate the documents for themselves. Quite frankly, User:129.173.208.167, I don't believe a word you're saying, but I'm willing to change my mind if someone can produce the goods. --Ardonik.talk() 19:09, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
• Now rewritten based on the few references that I could find that I considered even remotely reliable. Still needs to go to clean-up. Rossami 22:18, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • It looks good right now, and refreshingly neutral given the topic. But the article gives us no insight as to what MKNAOMI is, or if it even exists. Saying "information is scarce" about it is the equivalent of spreading hearsay. I'd rather have a red link than that.
    A web search for MKNAOMI tells you nothing but what other disreputable folk think it is. No offense, Rossami, but I'd still rather the article be deleted. If we want to prevent conspiracy theorists from recreating the page, we can redirect it to CIA cryptonym. --Ardonik.talk() 01:26, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
    • It's a long ways from an article like MKNAOMI to an article like MKULTRA. Solid facts will help, but nobody knows where they are. --Ardonik.talk() 01:39, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.