This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Presidents of the United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Presidents of the United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Presidents of the United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject Presidents of the United StatesTemplate:WikiProject Presidents of the United StatesPresidents of the United States
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory, conspiracy theories, and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
the documents are sourced exclusively via X without any secondary source scrutiny. Musk and DOGE have a 1A right to claim anything they like in any venue they like, and there's nothing to stop them from posting documents that have no connection to reality. moreover, they have no constitutional authority to cancel congressionally authorized spending, hence these documents show aspirational cuts rather than actual cuts, unless they've chosen to brazenly violate the Constitution. Per Department of Government Efficiency, the DOGE X account "often posts false or misleading information." I do not see in the article any suggestion that the documents reflect unconfirmed claims from the X account of an involved, partisan organization led by a man known for, how should I say ... exaggeration, though that's not the first word that popped into my head. soibangla (talk) 00:24, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With all respect, that sounds a lot like you just don't like DOGE. Do you have actual policy reasons to object to this list as (1) a stand-alone article or (2) a merge into the DOGE article? Every single document is indeed sourced by RS. Heck, two of them are called out by TIME Magazine and one is even mentioned directly by The New York Times. So, your statement of "are sourced exclusively via X without any secondary source scrutiny" is technically false (policy wise). I understand the logic being it, but that logic is a "I just don't like it" argument to avoid in deletion discussions. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page)02:28, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, a quick P.S., only one source, specifically, Gizmodo, is used to source DOGE's X account for being unreliable. Per WP:RSP, "There is no consensus on whether [Gizmodo] is generally reliable for controversial statements." The fact you tried to use Wikipedia, an unreliable source, to justify some of your "I just don't like it" reasoning for needing to speedy delete this is concerning. You trusted a statement sourced by a source that has no clear consensus on its own reliability to justify DOGE being unreliable. I would love to continue to conversation, but please keep it based on Wikipedia policy. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page)02:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With all respect, that sounds a lot like you just like DOGE. Do you have actual policy reasons to create to this list as a stand-alone article, or is it just that you've been trying to push screenshots of these documents on that main page for a week now? Etc. Selbsportrait (talk) 22:26, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
this organization has demonstrated deception, incompetence and a political agenda from the getgo, and thus there is good reason to be skeptical of these data that they have self-published. the whole thing stinks. soibangla (talk) 21:54, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
_(3x4_close_cropped).jpg)
