Wikipedia's article of Protest Warrior is up for deletion.

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Protest_Warrior (semi-vanity) ^ | 18-6-06 | _

[Irish_Thatcherite]

It has come to my attention from an email that the DUmmies are trying to get rid of the Prptest Warrior's Wikipedia entry, and apparently they have already axed Conservative Underground - Protest Warrior needs some help.

At the time of posting this thread, the vote is open for about another ten hours.

[Irish_Thatcherite]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Protest_Warrior

[Terpfen]

If you came to this page because a friend asked you to do so, or because you saw a message on an online forum pointing to this page, please note that this is not a vote. This is a discussion among Wikipedia editors and is aimed at reaching a consensus on whether the article is suitable for this encyclopedia. The outcome of AfD nominations are primarily determined by the quality of arguments for or against deletion; the process is immune to ballot-stuffing or sockpuppetry.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Wikipedia is left-wing? I'm shocked, knock me over with a feather.

[ovrtaxt]

Aw, cmon. What's a good debate without a little 'sockpuppetry'?

[Irish_Thatcherite]

Don't shoot the messenger!

I was asked because my friend thought it would help.

[Irish_Thatcherite]

LOL!

[Excellence]

"Keep meets notability requirements per Kimchi.sg. Plus an organized right wing protest group is notable because of its rarity and the fact that it hasn't managed to achieve large scale support. It tells us a lot about the political culture in the USA at this time that there are "left wing" protest organization that can get hundreds of thousands of people onto the streets, but the "right wing" cannot. That alone makes this notable and encyclopedic, regardless of your political viewpoint. Gwernol 11:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)"

The "left wing" is underwritten by George Soros and ANSWER. We, other the other hand, pay our own way, and have families to support.

[CheyennePress]

Interesting comparison: examine the write-ups for FreeRepublic and the DU. The latter gets not mention of hate speech, though I've never seen a group of more spiteful people.

[wolfpat]

We, other the other hand, pay our own way, and have families to support.

Not to mention that we tend to distrust large groups, even if the group is us.

[Arkinsaw]

Wikipedia is hopeless. The best bet is to just let it become what its editors want it to become...Liberalpedia. Then they can spout "NPOV" all they want but it will be so obviously hypocritical that no one will be fooled.

I love what they are doing with this article and the Kfir Alfia article. Common tactic...suggest that articles be merged...and then when they are all merged into one...put it up for deletion.

Wikipedia is HOPELESS. Its ridiculous to get involved with what is going on there.

[King Prout]

KEEP - Such charmingly Stalinist reasoning from those advocating purging PW from a public record: "It is yesterday's news"; "PW consists of very few people whatsoever... only one or two people per counterprotest"; "appears to be a group that has come and gone and nothing it did is worthy of more than a footnote in an encyclopedia"; et omnia generis alia...

"Yesterday's news"?
Were that the criterion by which entries in *reputable* public records were judged, the Encyclopedia Brittanica would be a single slender volume.
The purpose of any encyclopedia is to RECORD FACTS. Failing that, an encyclopedia would have no reason to exist at all.
One might as well advocate purging ALL of Wiki.
"Yesterday's news"... What a transparently idiotic brain-addled notion to put forth as "reason" in this debate.

Now, the following may be phrased in a tongue-in-cheek manner, but I am deadly serious.
Purging the politically inconvenient and annoying from the public record is a tried-and-true method of socialist propaganda.
The motto of those who seek to act in this manner is "he who controls the record of the past controls the future" - think about it, and consider the drive to delete PW from WIKI in that light.
An election cycle is just warming up, and it seems likely that it shall become quite heated.
Prior elections have demonstrated that Protest Warrior is an effective poke in the eye to the mass of folks parroting the usual global socialist talking points.
Seldom have "so few people whatsoever" so effectively rained on the kollectiv parades of so many Useful Idiots.
That they have ever been relevant earns them a permanent place in the record.
That they are likely to be so again merely reinforces their worth, and sheds cold light on the motives of some who would purge them from history.

King Prout - A People's Cube FReeper

[Irish_Thatcherite]

...suggest that articles be merged...and then when they are all merged into one...put it up for deletion.

Even the merging of articles alone is bad - two related but seperate topics thrown together confuses things somewhat.

[muawiyah]

The crowd at Wikipedia have already moved into operating the "memory hole" themselves.

This shouldn't have surprised anyone who has had experience with the professional left. They are all totalitarians at heart.

[Irish_Thatcherite]

The crowd at Wikipedia have already moved into operating the "memory hole" themselves.

That's a good description!

[uglybiker]

It tells us a lot about the political culture in the USA at this time that there are "left wing" protest organization that can get hundreds of thousands of people onto the streets, but the "right wing" cannot.

Right wingers keep their protests to the issue at hand, while the left, whatever the issue, brings out every left wing cause from the granole-muching enviromentalists to the hairy-armpit feminists.

And let's not forget that those on the right tend to be gainfully employed at occupations that keep the economy running and therefore don't have as much free time to go out andwander the streets waving signs.

[Irish_Thatcherite]

And let's not forget that those on the right tend to be gainfully employed at occupations that keep the economy running and therefore don't have as much free time to go out andwander the streets waving signs.

Tell me about it!

[Arkinsaw]

Even the merging of articles alone is bad - two related but seperate topics thrown together confuses things somewhat.

The tactics over there are ridiculous sometimes. You put something political up for deletion...someone puts the opposite up for deletion....you then vote FOR deletion on one....and then vote AGAINST deletion on the other by saying its a "revenge deletion".

If you were truly neutral, you would simply analyse the two using the same criteria and either both would go, or both would stay. Throwing in the "revenge deletion" herring allows you to throw away the point of view you do not like while keeping the one you do.

[Irish_Thatcherite]

Were that the criterion by which entries in *reputable* public records were judged, the Encyclopedia Brittanica would be a single slender volume.

True.

[LukeL]

Well the article does mention that DU only has 1,000 active users.

[Irish_Thatcherite]

then vote FOR deletion on one....and then vote AGAINST deletion on the other

That would suit John Kerry!! ;)