Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:DNFTT

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

The result of the discussion was  wrong venue to discuss a redirect; discussion moved to Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 July 1. Cunard (talk) 19:33, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

DNFTT


This page redirects to a reasonable essay on deescalating conflict, however, this abbreviation is typically used in chat to attack the other editor by blaming them for escalating a conflict. This seems to be at odds with our WP:Civility pillar and our WP:No personal attacks policy. Rather than encouraging this use through a shortcut that facilitates it, I recommend its deletion. Avanu (talk) 17:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * By way of clarification, you're proposing to delete the shortcut, rather than the actual essay? Newyorkbrad (talk) 18:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, absolutely right. Also, the redirect seems to have a history of switching back and forth between http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/What_is_a_troll%3F and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deny_recognition
 * Personally, my biggest problem with the redirect is that it encourages people to think in terms of "Don't feed the troll", which is a sideways perjorative attack, versus coming up with alternative ways to describe a conflict. If we're trying to encourage people to use civility, it doesn't seem useful to have shortcuts that encourage just the opposite. -- Avanu (talk) 20:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Then this discussion should be at WP:RFD rather than here. Hut 8.5 20:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. I'm not taking a position on this because I don't know if Avanu's factual premise is correct, i.e., how much this shortcut is used in "chats". However, if the consensus is to delete the shortcut itself, we need to also delete the reference from Deny recognition's shortcuts box.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:33, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Good question, is there some way to do a scan of Wikipedia to see how many things are linked to that redirect page and it's twins? The only reason it caught my attention at this moment was because of two instances where some editor was ranting at another editor and calling him a troll and linking to this. Typically when I see people say "Don't feed the troll", they are just being dismissive of someone else. -- Avanu (talk) 21:22, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I used Special:WhatLinksHere to check WP:DNFTT and WP:DFTT. It looks like there are about 1,050 pages linking to those two. About half are archives. They appear to all be Talk pages with just a couple exceptions. -- Avanu (talk) 00:47, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom. My personal experience is that the shortcut is unhelpful to the project. --Surturz (talk) 06:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep as no evidence or policy-based reason has been presented to support deletion of two redirects (WP:DNFTT and WP:DFTT) that have existed for six years—where is a list of examples of abuse? Any policy/guideline/essay/redirect could be abused, but when that happens attention should focus on the abuser, not the page that was misused. Wikipedia is not a group-hugging exercise where trolls are encouraged in the hope that niceness will make them see the error of their ways. It is often important to DENY recognition and a simple reference to DNFTT can be all that is required to alert good editors that further engagement would be counter productive. Re the "history of switching back and forth" mentioned above: that was due to a GNAA advocate who was eventually indeffed after becoming a little too blatant—they were apparently trying to undermine WP:DENY (see its history and talk). Johnuniq (talk) 08:04, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, actually I did present a policy-based reason. WP:Civility, which is not merely a policy, but a core policy aka Wikipedia Pillar. As far as evidence, I did provide the link above to Special:WhatLinksHere. I'm not going to go through a thousand pages, but I'll posts a few quotes for you, however, out of context it is less likely to make sense. I get the feeling that it will clearly support my position that it is used in a dismissive fashion. If WP:DENY is the guideline to give people, why do we need to rephrase it as "Do Not Feed The Troll"? I'm not advocating for people to be perfect in Wikipedia. To quote the mayor from Ghostbusters: "Being miserable and treating other people like dirt is every New Yorker's God-given right." Fortunately for us, Wikipedia has a policy that allows us to still be miserable sods, but we're supposed to at least not be jerks. -- Avanu (talk) 14:19, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Quotes from Special:WhatLinksHere
 * As I wrote elsewhere, by virtue of his inability or unwillingness to understand what we're telling him and reply coherently, WP:DNFTT seems to be the best course of action when dealing with Pumpie. Constantine ✍ 18:12, 5 November 2010 (UTC) from User_talk:Pumpie


 * WP:DNFTT is a good policy to follow. Ignore, and block if necessary. --NeilN talk to me 07:32, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Which leads to the question of whether invoking WP:DNFTT is in fact feeding the trolls or fanning the flames. Obotlig (talk) 20:28, 2 June 2012 (UTC) from User_talk:NeilN


 * And, basically, what is your point? You persist in being argumentative for unclear reasons -- noted on your talk page recently.  Like, are you a troll?  Others can continue to indulge you, but I'm cutting you off. Corticopia 04:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Corticopia, you don't speak for other editors. You have not torn through any statements, in fact you are resorting to argumentum ad hominem, argumentum ad metum, straw man (red herring) and several other fallacies and not even addressing the issue. There is no "POINT". I am being argumentative because we disagree; what is your point? It should be clear that my assertion that Americas in NOT America is not literal, but rather has to with connotation and precedence. By the way, are you, corticopia, a troll? I find it humorous that the only way you can back out of your fallacious statements is by calling me a troll, and avoiding the issues. I for one am glad "you are cutting me off" as I'm tired of your hearing your fallacious ad hominem attacks. Deepstratagem 04:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC) from Talk:Americas/Archive 1


 * Keep per Johnuniq. Shortcuts don't insult editors, editors insult editors. Nobody Ent 12:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Wrong venue List at WP:RfD. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I've crosslisted it there. People should be able to make it here from there. Honestly, since people have already weighed in, I believe I would need to be a lot of complicated things to actually move this to there. Does that crosslisting suffice? -- Avanu (talk) 14:35, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Speedy close per Wrong Venue, as SmoJoe explains. But before relisting at RFD, remember: An essay, or a shortcut, or an article, can't make us uncivil. Achowat (talk) 13:55, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You are right that essays and whatnot aren't what make people uncivil, but why would we encourage the use of terms that are uncivil? WP:DENY has a more neutral tone than WP:DNFTT. Part of changing the way we interact is through changing the words we choose to express ourselves. If I refer to you as 'My esteemed colleage from Pennsylvania' rather than as 'a douchebag troll', it sets a different tone entirely. While DNFTT doesn't plainly show the word 'troll', the implication is still there. I guess I'm just thinking that civility starts with how we label each other. -- Avanu (talk) 14:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The reason your argument falls flat, methinks, is because WP:DENY exists. It's softer and used frequently. Not only that, but WP:DNFTT doesn't mean anything to anyone. It's just a string of letters that brings you to WP:Deny recognition. The problem arises when people use Do not feed the trolls which could just as easily be Do not feed the trolls . Removing the redirect doesn't solve any of the problems. Achowat (talk) 17:20, 2 July 2012 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.