Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clinton body count conspiracy theory

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 keep‎. (non-admin closure) Dusti ^{*Let's talk!*} 23:01, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clinton body count conspiracy theory[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Was redirected in 2016. Is an article about a conspiracy theory that is unlikely to be true. From the article:

Several sources have discredited the conspiracy theory, such as Congressional Record,[11] the Lakeland Ledger, the Chicago Tribune, Snopes and others; pointing to detailed death records, the unusually large circle of associates that a president is likely to have, and the fact that many of the people listed had been misidentified or were still alive. Others had no known link to the Clintons

. p b p 19:36, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United States of America and Arkansas. p b p 19:36, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Its a widely referenced conspiracy theory. The wiki documents it and the debunking and the first sentence says its not true. The Clinton body count is a disproven conspiracy theory Softlemonades (talk) 19:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- just because a conspiracy theory isn't true doesn't mean it's not notable. That this one is is shown clearly by the sources already in the article. Central and Adams (talk) 20:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep look at all the new deaths, the theory may not be disproven, just not accepted yet. 75.169.169.36 (talk) 02:40, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
redirect to List of conspiracy theories#Clintons which could be expanded a bit naming some of the most commonly claimed "victims" but which already says about what this article says in a very short paragraph. Mangoe (talk) 21:41, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are plenty of sources showing the conspiracy theory's notability (WP:NFRINGE). Isi96 (talk) 00:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The theory being false doesn't negate the fact it has received WP:SIGCOV and thus meets WP:GNG. And, its not as if the article presents the conspiracy theory as fact. SoniaSotomayorFan (talk) 13:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Conspiracy theories-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:32, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NHOAX: "Wikipedia does have articles about notable hoaxes describing them as hoaxes." As the nominator observes, this conspiracy is prominent enough to have been debunked by several major publications. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:55, 3 August 2023 (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.