Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antifa apocalypse


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Refuse Fascism. Clear consensus to not keep. No consensus about whether to delete, redirect or merge. The redirect is a compromise between these positions. Further actions such as changing redirect target or merging content from history are possible subject to editorial consensus.  Sandstein  11:54, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Antifa apocalypse

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails GNG, no long term lasting impacts from a single event based on a hoax Darkness Shines (talk) 00:36, 7 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Hoaxes can be notable if widely covered by reliable sources (as is the case here). E.g. pizzagate.  Volunteer Marek   06:49, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - WTF is wikipedia becoming. - Netoholic @ 04:43, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * And this is a policy based argument for deletion how exactly?  Volunteer Marek   06:49, 7 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete – Netoholic is right. This flash-in-the-pan is not encyclopedic. – S. Rich (talk) 07:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge or redirect to Refuse Fascism, where this is already covered in better detail, or perhaps to Antifa (United States). Just another short-lived hoax from Infowars and co, worth mentioning in other articles for its brief coverage in RS but not notable enough per EVENT for a separate article. The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - could be worth a minor mention in some other article but hardly deserving of an article of its own. -- Longhair\talk 10:45, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * delete as bog-std. example of WP:NOTNEWS. Mangoe (talk) 14:59, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * delete – majorly WP:NOTNEWS and no long term notability Natureium (talk) 15:12, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect: Per Natureium's reasoning. Also, this "article" blatantly violates WP:NPOV and reads as an attack page. The editor who created this page can't get enough in slapping the words "fake news", "conspiracy theory", and "false" in every spot he can possibly find. Also, he misrepresents sources. The TIME source refers to Fox News as "mainstream", but this article says "more established conservative media" when attacking FNC and referring to its mention in the source. Also, reading the FNC source itself (which oddly isn't even cited in the article), FNC admits that the organizers have no intention of violence (is WaPo also to blame for promoting this conspiracy theory?). Thus, this garbage should be deleted. The title can be redirect to the Refuse Fascism article. --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 16:23, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * So you're saying that this "Antifa apocalypse" was NOT a conspiracy theory or fake? Can you point me to the closest smoldering ruins of our polity then? I somehow missed all the destruction and hellfire. No sources are being misrepresented, and I don't appreciate your accusation. Your bias is clouding your judgement.  Volunteer Marek   16:29, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm saying that your bias is clouding your judgment -- we all know what your political views are, and I could tell it was your work when I read it (even before checking the article history). An editor who paid more attention to NPOV would have worded it much differently, at least using the sources you used. And no, I am not saying what you think I'm saying. Just because something is a conspiracy theory/fake news/etc. doesn't mean we should go overboard with using such terms in every place we can. --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 21:18, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I see you're struggling with actually addressing the question and instead have decided to comment on me personally. You also sound very familiar.  Volunteer Marek   02:12, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I know where you're going on the first part -- you want to drag me into a debate on whether this is actually fake news or not (which is completely irrelevant with my concerns). While I also think this is a hoax/fake news/conspiracy theory, I strongly disagree with shoving that fact in people's faces, and it won't even change people's opinions.
 * I also find it interesting that you are complaining about "comment[ing] on [you] personally," when you said the very exact same thing about me in your comment above. Also, you have have several comments recently where you made moralizing comments attacking others (like at Talk:Roy Moore), accusing me of being a POV-pusher, and now even implying (falsely) that I'm a sock. Your behavior is toxic, violates WP:PERSONAL, and I am seriously considering reporting you. --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 02:38, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't imply you were a sock. But it's pretty clear where you're getting your talking points from. As to my comments on Roy Moore - you deserved every bit of it as your comments there were quite shameful.  Volunteer Marek   02:42, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, more moralizing and demonizing people who don't hold the same views as youself. With this toxic behavior, you also deserve the treatment some editors give you. And tell me what "You also sound very familiar" means beside being a sock, something I have never done? --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 02:47, 12 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge to Antifa (United States). My very best wishes (talk) 20:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Trivial, barely 'news'. Topic will be forgotten in a week by anyone who's aware of it now. Cjhard (talk) 20:31, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Refuse Fascism or merge into Antifa (United States) per WP:NOTNEWS. The main Antifa article does not seem to currently cover it, so in this case a simple redirect would not be enough.  — Paleo  Neonate  – 21:25, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Refuse Fascism and/or merge info into Antifa (United States) - The necessary info has been covered well enough in Refuse Fascism. The Verified Cactus 100% 01:28, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: as the creator of this article I'm fine with it being merged, though I would prefer it be merged to the main Antifa article rather than the "Refuse Fascism" article, since I'm not sure if the latter one is even notable.  Volunteer Marek   16:29, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * According to Refuse Fascism, they claim not to be affiliated with Antifa, and the article also says that the claim of civil war was in response to protests that they were organizing on 4 Nov, though Infowars and other similar sources were simply using the umbrella term "Antifa" to describe the threat. The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:08, 9 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge to Antifa (United States). Insufficiently notable for a standalone article. Topic is already covered in detail in Refuse Fascism as mentioned, but this article should not be merged or redirected there as that group is not formally affiliated with the Antifa movement. Funcrunch (talk) 18:24, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to Antifa (United States). Disinformation campaigns in politics are of note, and this one can be merged with the Twitter hoax into a sub-section in Antifa with little problem. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 13:16, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: such a ridiculous and insignificant conspiracy theory that isn't not even worth a mention here. It isn't even in the level of notability of Pizzagate or Birtherism. NoMoreHeroes (talk) 20:46, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia should not be in either the fake news, fake outrage or hoax spreading business. This was covered in jest and is not a serious hoax or fake news item and WP shouldn't cover either as if it where.  Had it been widely reported prior to being covered in jest, it would have been covered as a noteworthy upcoming event.  It was not and was only created to use Wikipedia to push it as a hoax and CT.  WP is not that platform.  --DHeyward (talk) 02:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Did you actually bother reading the article? The article was NOT created to push a hoax. It's sort of funny that another editor right above is arguing that the article makes too much of this being a hoax and here you are confused on the subject.  Volunteer Marek   02:14, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Since the comment above agrees with me, your comment has no merit. If it was significant, the first edition of the article wouldn't have claimed it was a hoa.  But this was so insignificant as to not warrant any mention until someone created it to spread the notion that these hoaxes were maintream.  Wikipedia is not your forum for pushing fringe views.  That includes the fringe view that this was a noteworthy hoax.  --DHeyward (talk) 05:43, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Don't bother engaging VM. He likes to try to get a rise out of anyone he disagrees with. Natureium (talk) 15:25, 13 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete and redirect all relevant material to Refuse Fascism, where the conspiracy theory originated. HastyBriar321 (talk) 03:56, 12 November 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.