Not found on Wikipedia. There is one page where the term appears, but only showing the redirect, to a page that does not contain the term.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_climate_change#Claims_of_alarmism
Digging into the redirect page, the history files show it did once exist.
en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Climate_alarmism&oldid=102478055
Of course. But the changing the page to a redirect wipes out all the info, and the page it redirects to does not contain anything about climate alarmism, or any related term.
It's exactly what I expected to find. We can even see where somebody decided the page had to go.
It's right here
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Climate_alarmism&oldid=104538090
User:
Luna Santin
Looking at the user contributions shows somebody who was posting on Wikipedia in a manic fashion, over 500 edits in 4 days
Over 500 more edits in the next three days, it goes on and on. Thousands and thousands of edits. (user stopped all editing in 2012)
I know this because I am trying to find the user history surrounding the deletion edit of 2007. And having to look through 10,000 edits to find it. 4,7000 edits in August 2006 alone.
Another 5,000 edits in September 2006. OK this is absurd, I don't even have to keep looking.
It would mean going through 40,000 more edits at least. OK I had to see, it was actually only 36,000 more edits. I'm not joking here.
In general it's another example of how things that some people don't like" get deleted from Wikipedia. By various means. And it can be a very small number of people involved. Sometimes just one.
(this brief commentary, on this blog, is itself something that is not found on Wikipedia)
Finding the user contribution history allowed us to know the reason used for deletion/redirect.
Here it is "title is inherently POV; an NPOV article can't be written with this title"
So a term is "inherently pov", so it can't exist on Wikipedia. That is too funny for words. Make the effort finding it worth it.
Lets see if that phrase exists anywhere else on the internet.
Nope. That is the only place it is to be found, anywhere.
And now also on this blog post.
Can it be due to the grammar error. (should be "a NPOV", not 'an NPOV')
What about just "an NPOV article can't be written with this title"? Does that exist? What if we fix the grammar?
Nope. No version of that phrase exists anywhere else. Fascinating. It's something found on Wikipedia, that quite simply has never been written online before. And at the same time, used as the reason to delete an article, which of course was about something that does exist.
Wikipedia. is our modern woke world made large.
