Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bushhitler

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. — JIP | Talk 13:32, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bushhitler

Possible Hoax But defenaly hopeless POV Delete --JAranda | yeah 23:55, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

• Cleanup I was thinking about an Afd nomination but marked it for POV and cleanup because it gets some 10,000 Googles (many, although not all, for this term) and it's not hopelessly POV and reasonably well-written. Dlyons493 Talk 00:11, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, it still is something that can't be conceived as NPOV. Titoxd 00:12, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. BS. -- BD2412 ^talk 01:31, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete the way political debate is going in this country everyone is "just like Hitler" at sometime in their political life. None of them deserve their own articles. This seems like the sort of neologism that will disappear in 4 years and will not produce anything of note. Unless, of course, Bush becomes dictator... --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 01:32, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. It would be interesting to see an article on the Bush-hating phenomenon in the United States since 2000. I could not find one but maybe it exists somewhere. If there were such an article, this term could be added to that article. ♠DanMS 01:52, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Republican president likened to Hitler, film at 11. Gazpacho 02:02, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Anti-George Bush POV article. Andrew pmk | Talk 03:12, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. If it was widespread, it could be included at List of pejorative political puns, which also includes epithets; but it isn't. --Aquillion 04:07, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Any article that proves Godwin's Law should be deleted. Joaquin Murietta 05:12, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete POV --Rogerd 08:14, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• delete as per nom, hopelessly POV. Roodog2k (talk) 13:45, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- it's just a political attack, surely? Inherently PoV. Phronima 14:05, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- Better use of Wikipedian resources than to dedicated space to a partisan political attack.----Keetoowah 18:43, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Neutral -- I find this type of rhetoric repugnant, but this particular is actually pretty widespread: I know because I've gotten in a lot of arguments with people who undercut the effectiveness of anti-war demonstrations with signs like this. I think there could be a good article on this particular piece of rhetoric, just like there could be on "Cripple in the White House" (FDR), but I don't particularly expect a contentious place like Wikipedia to produce that worthwhile article. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:09, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Strong keep. Neutral article on an inherently POV word. Nothing wrong with that. Could use a clean up though. --Miborovsky 21:49, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. If every conceivable political pejorative deserves its own article, then we've all got a lot of writing to do. (I call dibs on "Chimpy McChimperson.") --PHenry 23:00, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete This article is extremely OFFENSIVE and does not belong on Wikipedia. To compare George W. Bush to Adolf Hitler is just disgusting. Misterrick 00:33, 02 October 2005 (UTC).
  • Then delete shit, fuck, mofo and a plethora of other articles that could offend people. The comparison of Bush to Hitler is a phenomenon. It exists regardless whether this page does or not. --Miborovsky 00:44, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
• delete per PHenry Derex 04:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. If the contents can be proved notable by more than one source, that is, and not just a crackpot idea. The Wookieepedian 20:35, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

  A source? Well, any significant anti-war protest has signs with this theme [1][2]. But as I noted, it's been a feature of US left-wing politics for the past 40 years to equate conservatives with Hitler, Nazis, the Klan, etc. Gazpacho

  • I think you'll find that it's a trait of extremist politics in general, Gazpacho, left and right. The Republicans in the House of Representatives recently got called out for their hypocrisy on this point just last year, for example. As for the article: Delete, unless someone can demonstrate it to be anything other than slang. Justin Bacon 00:48, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep (But definitely clean up) It is irrelevent whether the viewpoint is accurate, popular, or offensive. The fact is, it is an idea that is held by many people. Deleting it because you don't like the idea would in and of itself violate the NPOV standard. Cpaliga 04:27, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep but clean, expand, and link to outside sources more credible.--Guitarist6987876 04:33, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, I can't imagine anybody arguing we need a John Kerry is a U.N. pussy article, so I'm not sure this particular insult hurled at Bush really needs its own article either. Sherurcij 09:15, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per above.  Grue  16:07, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• comment Comparisons of Bush and Hitler are fairly widespread (as a quick Google search will confirm). While Wikipedia should definitely not have an article actually comparing Bush to Hitler, and should probably not have an article under this particular title, an acknowledgement of the existence of such comparisons (without endorsing them) would be appropriate and could probably, with some effort, be made NPOV. -- Avocado 23:50, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• strong delete I do not see how this could be made POV --Isolani 06:37, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
• delete - this article is biased, and completely pointless, and it could easily be made part of another article. XYaAsehShalomX 12:28, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
• delete - An encyclopidia is about facts...since you really can't compare anyone to Hitler this shouldn't belong. Would you find it Brittania? World Book? that is why it should be deleted.Flying Canuck 03:09, 8 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.