Talk:AKFD

Talk regarding the article Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead' - now a section of anti-gay slogan. At this location because some Wikipedians found the old talk location offensive. Martin 18:54, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Old talk archived at:

• Talk:AKFD/content - you know, boring stuff like facts and phrases and suchlike.
• Talk:AKFD/existence - should this article/content exist at all?
• Talk:AKFD/merge - discussion of merging this article with another
• Talk:AKFD/title - discussion of the best title
• Talk:AKFD/redirect - discussion of redirects and their deletion
  • Talk:AKFD/Voting rules - discussion of opinion poll on above page
• Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (slogans) - general discussion of the correct article titles for slogans
• meta:redirects and searching - possible software solution to problems with redirects and searches
• Talk:AKFD/November 2003 - Latest deletion debates from VfD

By archiving the material in this way, five talk pages with "AIDS Kills Fags Dead" in their titles were created.

A brief history of time

AxelBoldt created AIDS Kills Fags Dead. Concerns were initially raised on three grounds:

• existence - Should this content even be allowed to exist? Is it encyclopedic? Most said yes, but some said no.
• merge - Should this content be merged into a wider article, such as homophobic hate speech or anti-gay slogan? Mixed views, no resolution. Some edit warring took place on this.
• title - What title should this article be placed under, if it remains? Most felt the word "slogan" should be used somewhere, but disagreed as to where. However, some felt that the original title was best. Again, some edit warring took place on this.

By a random act of vandalism, the issue of redirects to this page was raised, some time later, and whether some or all of them should be deleted. This was discussed at Talk:AKFD/redirect, and there was an opinion poll where people expressed their opinion. Discussion occurred sporadically for one and a half months. Then, as a compromise, the redirect at 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead' slogan was deleted, after listing on wikipedia:votes for deletion for a week.

Subsequently, two new redirects were recreated. Wikipedia now has more pages with "AIDS Kills Fags Dead" in their titles than exist on the rest of the Internet combined.

---

The slogan seems to have but two historical instances of any significance: being worn on a t-shirt at a concert, and being used as a catchphrase of Fred Phelps. Wikipedia now is the number one user of the phrase, (I suspect we may actually have ALL the Internet pages so titled) so I'd say it pretty much means what we say it does...since we are now the undisputed number one user of the phrase. -- Someone else 06:22, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Well, the number one mentioner, maybe... (And very few of those mentions would be there if people had just left the article alone in the first place.) There are still over a hundred non-Wikipedia-related pages (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22AIDS+Kills+Fags+Dead%22+-wikipedia) with the phrase on it, so the phrase is probably better-known than some of the more obscure topics that we have uncontroversial articles about.

I don't see why we should worry about mentioning a phrase just because we find its use offensive, anyway. I doubt anyone is going to start using the phrase just because they found it in an encyclopaedia... If they do, we can just counter-attack by writing an article on a well-known slogan with a nicer sentiment behind it, so that people start using that. :) -- Oliver P. 09:27, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Not merely the #1 mentioner: the #1 publiciser. None of those hundred you mention have AKFD in its title, while at least 13 of ours do. Words in the name of a title of a page are counted, as you know, as more significant when Google makes its arcane calculations about "best" hits.

* 1	* AIDS Kills Fags Dead (redirect page)
* 2	* AIDS kills fags dead (redirect page)
* 3	* AIDS Kills Fags Dead (slogan) (redirect page)
* 4	* AIDS Kills Fags Dead slogan (redirect page)
* 5	* Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead (redirect page)
* 6	* Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead' (redirect page)
* 7		 Talk:Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead'
* 8		 Talk:Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead'/merge
* 9		 Talk:Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead'/title
*10		 Talk:Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead'/from Talk:Anti-gay slogan (redirect page)
*11		 Talk:Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead'/merge
*12		 Talk:Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead'/redirect
*13	* Slogan:AIDS Kills Fags Dead (redirect page)

These thirteen pages were greated by ill-thought-out moves, splitting of discussions on to new pages, etc., and are the kind of mistakes that can be fixed only through deletion. Wikipedia is worse, not better for having 13 AKFD pages rather than 2. -- Someone else 11:01, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Note that google is smart enough not to list both an article and a redirect to that article, so of those thirteen pages, only five are listed in google, and only two of those are in the top ten. The article itself, and the /redirect talk page, as it happens.

I think Someone Else is overemphasising our importance. One encyclopedia article, plus some talk pages. At a push, we might be the #1 mentioner in that portion of the internet that's indexed by google. There's a whole portion of the internet out there that's not indexed by google, or not publically available, and there's an even larger slab of communication that doesn't take place over the internet. I don't think Wikipedia is going to become a major language authority any time soon. Martin 18:21, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Good for the language, I suppose. So your viewpoint is that it's good for us to overemphasize the phrase's importance because...we don't matter? We don't matter, so we don't have to get it right? -- Someone else 02:01, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

No, neither of those are my viewpoints.

Your viewpoint appears to be that "Wikipedia now is the number one user of the phrase". My viewpoint is that Wikipedia's mentions of the phrase is an insignificant proportion of total mentions of the phrase. I don't know why that might be relevant, but I assume you know, since you brought it up? Martin 02:28, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Search engines grade "hits" on whether they occur in the page title, and on number of intra-site and extra-site links. I've described why I think having 13 pages on the English Wikipedia overemphasizes the importance of this phrase. Why do you think it's a good idea to have these 13 pages? Why are they a good thing? -- Someone else 02:46, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I've described why I think some, but not all, of the eight redirects are a good thing at Talk/Redirect - the raw text is in the unrefactored version. You've read that, I hope, so I won't repeat myself. I've described why I think the five talk pages are a good thing at VfD, though I'd be fine with Angela's proposed compromise. Martin 03:20, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

If your sole reason for wanting to keep them is that their histories contain unrefactored text, would not prevailing upon a developer to merge the histories in one place, followed by Angela's compromise please all? Assuming we could find someone who knows how and will... -- Someone else 03:28, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Seperate talk pages is just more useful, I believe. For example, wikipedia:archived deletion debates and wikipedia talk:deletion policy/redirect should link to the AKFD/Talk/Redirect page. The AKFD/Talk/Merge page will be useful when we have similar discussions over whether we should have a seperate article on nigger (word), fuck, felching, Limey, etc. For someone editing the AKFD section of anti-gay slogan, Talk/AKFD/Content is most useful. Martin 18:22, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

---

I've changed the titles to all of the Talk page subpages (merge, title, existence etc) to just say AKFD instead of Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead'. It wasn't clear if this needed to be done for other pages like Talk:AIDS Kills Fags Dead and Talk:AIDS Kills Fags Dead slogan which are redirects with no history anyway or whether those are just to be deleted. As far as I know I fixed all the links that were pointing to the old, now deleted, titles. I didn't know what to do with the rest of them as I can't be bothered reading 10 pages of discussion on the issue, so the current VfD stuff is at Talk:AKFD/November 2003 until someone decides what the conclusion of that was. Angela 14:27, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I'll list the talk page redirects on talk:AKFD/redirect and get votes. Martin 17:56, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

December 2003

In December, A new AIDS kills fags dead was created and deleted with the following discussion occuring on VfD:

• AIDS kills fags dead - It's back. This time as a Lest We Forget lament for AIDS victims. Not an encyclopedia article. Bmills 11:53, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC) (content before blanking is at Talk:AIDS_kills_fags_dead -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 14:40, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC))
  • Mr. Bmills, you are right. This is a hideously POV page and rather nonsensical. --Merovingian 11:58, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • How about changing the text to '"AIDS kills fags dead" is an annoying article that keeps reappearing on Wikipedia even though we keep deleting it'? That'll stop it reappearing all the time... Otherwise delete... Francs2000 12:15, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • A nice little personal essay, but it has no place in an encylcopedia. Delete. Tannin
  • It doesn't even pretend to be encyclopedic, does it? Kill this article dead. --MIRV 12:25, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Also, we should decide here and now that the next time someone recreates this entry, it may be deleted immediately, with no requirement for yet another seven-day wait. (And I don't care what content it sports, the title itself is sufficient cause.) If it comes back, let's just delete it right away. Tannin 12:26, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Absolutely! Purges must be necessary from time to time. A chronic problem needs an immediate solution: deletion, no challenge. --Merovingian 12:29, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)
    • I concur. Dysprosia 12:31, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • And I. At least this version is not offensive. I note that Tannin has blanked the article, which I think a bit unfortunate. The least offensive bit is gone while the offensive title remains. Bmills 12:39, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • It's a very sweet essay written under a homophobic title which the author presumably had to recreate as no normal pages link to it. It was written/created by Radgeek who's only been on wikipedia for 24 hours. It all seems very bizarre. Secretlondon 12:33, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)
    • The rotten newbies are bizarre by nature. --Merovingian 12:39, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)
      • It's never a newbie. Secretlondon 12:47, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)
      • Now that you put it that way, you're right: first they're IP #s, then they get themselves names, then the Wiki dies... --Merovingian 12:53, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)
      • While generally in favour of being kind to newbies (just starting to not be one myself, IMO), I think this discussion is irrelevant here. Newbie, oldie, this title should go. Bmills 12:58, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Nuke this thing. Regardless of content, 'AIDS kills fags dead' is just not something we want to show decent society. Die! With avengence! - Litefantastic 12:40, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Precisely. You wouldn't find something like this in Britannica *snork*,... now would you? Appearance is everything. --Merovingian 12:46, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • Make the subject a protected redirect to Bigot. Otherwise, it will keep returning.Dogface 13:18, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • That's a good idea, or block it in some other way. Francs2000 13:26, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Blockage = relief. --Merovingian 14:46, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • I don't think Radgeek should be pounced on, he's made good contributions to philosophy articles. If this page was going to be redirected and protected, the logical target is Anti-gay slogan, where all other variants of AKFD redirect to (such as the capitalised version). It's not logical for different pages with essentially the same title to redirect to different places. However, I believe it was decided a while ago to delete Akfd entirely... Evercat 13:33, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • I'm sorry for the anti-Radgeek attitude. Your redirect suggestion is quite good. --Merovingian 14:46, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • "No normal pages link to it" (Secretlondon)? What about Talk:Anti-French sentiment in the United States, Wikipedia:Top 10 Google hits, A-K (!), and Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (slogans)? And if we had not been so hypocritical and left AxelBoldt's (absolutely NPOV) article at AIDS kills fags dead we wouldn't have any problems now with users -- whether newbies or not -- recreating the article. So the best thing to do would be a redirect to wherever the original text is hidden now. --KF 16:09, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Delete. There's a surprise for you, eh? In point of fact, the reason I posted this was primarily because I encountered the link under Wikipedia:Top 10 Google Hits, A-K and, after considering a researched NPOV article about the AIDS holocaust, and then decided that I have better things to do than educate anyone who would go looking under that headline. So, instead, I just posted what I posted so that some measure of sanity would be there until the article was tossed into a (hopefully permanent) garbage bin and the associated links were tossed along with it. Wildly unprofessional? I suppose that it is; but it's something that I feel very strongly about and that leads me into rash actions. In any case, I'll atone by adding some more philosophy material. Ciao. Radgeek 21:37, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Delete this piece of garbage. Daniel Quinlan 04:29, Dec 10, 2003 (UTC)
  • Yes, delete. --Minesweeper 09:26, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Delete. And do not redirect! See Talk:AKFD/redirect. Angela. 23:53, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)