Wikipedia has a lengthy entry on cancel culture
, but “Texit” architect Daniel Miller swears the site itself is a cancel-culture co-conspirator.
On Friday, Miller, who’s running for lieutenant governor, said in a statement that it took 25 years serving the Lone Star State
to finally get his own Wikipedia entry. (Never mind that Wikipedia is only two decades old.) But the leader of the pro-secessionist Texas Nationalist Movement claimed that after just six hours of being live, the “cancel culture mafia” tried to get his bio removed.
“While I’ve often used Wikipedia, I’ve never been particularly driven to have my own entry,” Miller wrote. “Apparently, someone decided after working for Texas independence for 25 years, being interviewed by countless media outlets, speaking at over 1,000 events over the years, and being mentioned in other Wikipedia entries that it was time for my own standalone entry.”
To Miller, his page’s potential removal is par for the course of the raging war against the “mini-Stalins of the world.” Still, he counts the effort to delete his entry as “the surest sign that we are winning.”
Is it, though?
Recent polling by the University of Texas/Texas Tribune
shows that 56% of Texas voters
would cast their ballot for Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick in a Republican primary; another 36% claimed to have no opinion. The remaining 9% are opting for “someone else,” meaning that their vote would go to Miller — or one of the other four Republican challengers
Still, Miller isn’t one to be deterred. The whole ordeal leaves him to believe that the enemy "[views] our work as a legitimate threat to their attempts to shackle us with their neo-Marxist ideology.”
The way Miller sees it, his run for lieutenant governor
has driven the liberal elites into a “panic like no other." He also claims that the political establishment and progressives are worried that he’ll soon kick the incumbent to the curb. (We’re pretty sure that many progressives would welcome a Patrick replacement
, actually, but they probably wouldn't opt for Miller.)
Biographies on Wikipedia must pertain to a “notable” person, meaning they've been covered by numerous published and reliable secondary sources.
On a discussion page
covering Miller’s divisive biography, some petitioned for the site to keep his bio up. One user argued that aside from running for office, Miller is notable because he’s an author who was mentioned in several pre-candidacy news articles (including this one by the Observer
“I mean, all there needs to be to exceed the notability threshold is having multiple sources which are not from the subject. He well passes this bar,” the user wrote.
But another person argued for deletion, saying Miller-related information can be added to the election page, as is typical. They also weren’t swayed by the fact that some news stories had mentioned Miller: “I don't think the above articles convey any sort of lasting notability.”