Revision as of 07:19, 4 September 2019 editClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,372,425 editsm Archiving 1 discussion to Misplaced Pages talk:No Nazis/Archive 1. (BOT)← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:23, 4 September 2019 edit undo37.175.166.175 (talk)No edit summaryTags: Mobile edit Mobile web editNext edit → | ||
Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
This section "That the concept of free speech entails freedom to post race, gender, or identity-based slurs, insults, or promotion and glorification of violence, without any consequence whatsoever, and that any consequence brought upon them is an act of censorship." is not a belief that only racists believe. And this belief is not racist. Anarchists also believes that for example. So that's like a personal attack. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 05:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | This section "That the concept of free speech entails freedom to post race, gender, or identity-based slurs, insults, or promotion and glorification of violence, without any consequence whatsoever, and that any consequence brought upon them is an act of censorship." is not a belief that only racists believe. And this belief is not racist. Anarchists also believes that for example. So that's like a personal attack. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 05:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
:No. You do not get to use cries of "but muh freeze peach" as an excuse to be an asshole. Only assholes think this way. Anarchists (of which I am one!) do not believe this. Anarchists believe that ''all'' actions have consequences, including - and ''especially'' - speech. You may want to actually learn what the word means and what the philosophy entails.--] (]) 05:35, 4 September 2019 (UTC) | :No. You do not get to use cries of "but muh freeze peach" as an excuse to be an asshole. Only assholes think this way. Anarchists (of which I am one!) do not believe this. Anarchists believe that ''all'' actions have consequences, including - and ''especially'' - speech. You may want to actually learn what the word means and what the philosophy entails.--] (]) 05:35, 4 September 2019 (UTC) | ||
You're right, but either way, the belief that this section describes isn't ''racist''. It's a belief that racists have sometimes, but this belief in itself isn't racist. That's a stupid belief, but we banning people just for stupid beliefs is wrong. That's not just racists that have this belief. |
Revision as of 19:23, 4 September 2019
This page was nominated for deletion on 20 February 2019. The result of the discussion was speedy keep. |
Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
Endorsers
The following editors endorse the contents of this essay.
- Simonm223 (talk) 19:08, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hob Gadling (talk) 05:40, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- K.e.coffman (talk) 02:29, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- Ian.thomson (talk) 23:47, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- Tsumikiria⧸ 🌹🌉 04:20, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
- PeterTheFourth (talk) 12:37, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:54, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Pokerplayer513 (talk) 00:31, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Jorm (talk) 01:10, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 04:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:47, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- A Dolphin (squeek?) 15:58, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Legacypac (talk) 21:22, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
- Nazi ideology is an ongoing contemporary problem worth recognizing and addressing. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:32, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
- ―Susmuffin 17:05, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
- –dlthewave ☎ 23:06, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
- RolandR (talk) 11:55, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
- oknazevad (talk) 20:49, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- pythoncoder (talk | contribs)
WP:VERYFINEPEOPLE
The Misplaced Pages:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_March_9#Misplaced Pages:VERYFINEPEOPLE closed with a split result. Given a number of editors found it problematic, and another shortcut is displayed, there is little to no reason to display this shortcut on the page. It can continue to exist and be used by those who want to use it but we should not display it here. Legacypac (talk) 21:27, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
If you are going to restore this - make a case here please. Legacypac (talk) 22:26, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
- The redirect can still be used(due to no consensus on deletion). The shortcut has, however, been identified as misleading and contentious.
- There is definitely no consensus to keep the shortcut, we already know that from the deletion discussion. The default move is to not include it - shortcuts are a measure to highlight useful links for those who want to link a section or page in a shortened way. The "shortcut" here is longer than the page name(useless as shortcut) and additionally a contentious link that may confuse people. Can we remove that, now?Lurking shadow (talk) 00:19, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- If I interpret correctly, AfD works by "There is no consensus to delete". It's another matter for its inclusion in the article. Tsumikiria⧸ 🌹🌉 00:20, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, of course. If I see a shortcut, I know that I should be able to use it without irritation or other problems. If there is no consensus for a shortcut then editors have a problem with that shortcut. Which means it should be removed. If there is no consensus to delete a redirect then it is definitely not an acceptable shortcut.Lurking shadow (talk) 00:30, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- We should not display a controversial shortcut. The RFD shows that some good faith editors find it problematic so there is no good reason to force the display of the shortcut on a highly emotionally charged topic for am essay. Display here detracts and distracts from the point of the essay, politicizing it. Legacypac (talk) 00:37, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- "Racism is bad" is an inherently political statement so that reasoning doesn't wash.--Jorm (talk) 00:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Wow, care to expand on that statement? Legacypac (talk) 01:03, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- What should I expand on? Do you not grasp that holding a position about human rights and empathy is political, or that your argument that "politicizing" an already political essay doesn't make sense?--Jorm (talk) 01:06, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Racism is aberrant, not a political view. Legacypac (talk) 02:18, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Huh. In my experience, racism is anything but an aberrant viewpoint; it seems fairly common and the fact that we have to constantly discuss it here indicates that it is becoming more mainstream. I guess you use a different definition for "politics".--Jorm (talk) 02:24, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Racism is aberrant, not a political view. Legacypac (talk) 02:18, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- What should I expand on? Do you not grasp that holding a position about human rights and empathy is political, or that your argument that "politicizing" an already political essay doesn't make sense?--Jorm (talk) 01:06, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Wow, care to expand on that statement? Legacypac (talk) 01:03, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- "Racism is bad" is an inherently political statement so that reasoning doesn't wash.--Jorm (talk) 00:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- We should not display a controversial shortcut. The RFD shows that some good faith editors find it problematic so there is no good reason to force the display of the shortcut on a highly emotionally charged topic for am essay. Display here detracts and distracts from the point of the essay, politicizing it. Legacypac (talk) 00:37, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, of course. If I see a shortcut, I know that I should be able to use it without irritation or other problems. If there is no consensus for a shortcut then editors have a problem with that shortcut. Which means it should be removed. If there is no consensus to delete a redirect then it is definitely not an acceptable shortcut.Lurking shadow (talk) 00:30, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- If I interpret correctly, AfD works by "There is no consensus to delete". It's another matter for its inclusion in the article. Tsumikiria⧸ 🌹🌉 00:20, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- I don't have a particularly strong view on the redirect one way or another, but I think there's a better argument for not including it than the RfD: the shortcut box would have four redirects and that is a bit excessive. I can't imagine ANI having WP:HAPPYPLACE and the like there: it would clutter it and cluttering with jokes is less than ideal. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:24, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- It's a shortcut for a section.Lurking shadow (talk) 14:40, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Should be removed. It's an inside joke that won't make any sense to the vast majority of readers. This essay is not intended to be humorous. Ivanvector (/Edits) 14:45, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Ah, I misread where it was. My bad. I still think two redirects aren't needed there, but it is less of an issue than at the top. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:19, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment: as the creator of the redirect, I would be fine for it to stay out. I did not realise that it could be so divisive. I still think it's apt, but would not want to see edit warring over it. But I do hope that people continue to use it. --K.e.coffman (talk) 19:09, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Deprecate While I appreciate the attempt at humor this is going to be seen by more than a few as a political shot at the Clown N Chief. Best to give that a pass. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:42, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Free speech
This section "That the concept of free speech entails freedom to post race, gender, or identity-based slurs, insults, or promotion and glorification of violence, without any consequence whatsoever, and that any consequence brought upon them is an act of censorship." is not a belief that only racists believe. And this belief is not racist. Anarchists also believes that for example. So that's like a personal attack. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.175.163.63 (talk) 05:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- No. You do not get to use cries of "but muh freeze peach" as an excuse to be an asshole. Only assholes think this way. Anarchists (of which I am one!) do not believe this. Anarchists believe that all actions have consequences, including - and especially - speech. You may want to actually learn what the word means and what the philosophy entails.--Jorm (talk) 05:35, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
You're right, but either way, the belief that this section describes isn't racist. It's a belief that racists have sometimes, but this belief in itself isn't racist. That's a stupid belief, but we banning people just for stupid beliefs is wrong. That's not just racists that have this belief.