Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flying Spaghetti Monster
Appearance
- Keep Kansas and the nation are at risk of brain death if we don't encourage skeptical thinking. Wikipedia plays a great role in this endeavor.
- Keep This article documents the creation of an "illegitimate" religion. The subject may be satirical (which I don't believe is grounds for deletion to begin with), however the events surrounding and leading to its inception are actual. One researching this period of time who manages to stumble upon this page (or any given article in tangeable press) will discover the circumstances that brought this joke to life and furthermore won't be mislead into thinking FSM is an actual deity. The article is clearly prefaced in this way. The FSM phenomenon actually took place and it deserves a home in Wikipedia. Jack Driscoll 21 August 2005
- Keep The great thing about the Wikipedia is that you can find quality information about topics that might not be otherwise found in a regular Encyclopedia. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is now its own entity that will have a life on the internet, just like I_kiss_you. It is important that this piece of history be recorded, and the Wikipedia is the best place to do it. -- unsigned vote by 24.84.192.212 (talk · contribs); user's first and second edits
- Keep To remove this yet keep other similar nonsense by "organized" religions would be hypocritical. 67.10.88.183 (talk · contribs)'s only edit
- Keep At one point, this would have been just a joke; now, it is a joke with a rebellious undertone. I believe it is worth keeping. –Cory M. 11:54:34, 2005-08-21 (UTC) CoryM (talk · contribs)'s fifth edit
- Keep It is important, funny and great. --64.54.250.128 05:17, 21 August 2005 (UTC) 64.54.250.128 (talk · contribs)'s only edit
- Keep Comes under freedom of speech and opinion. Edward301 03:50, 21 August 2005 (UTC) Edward301 (talk · contribs)'s eighth edit
- Ummm, while I'm in agreement with the keep vote, Edward, you're aware that neither freedom of speech nor opinion are criteria for keeping an article on Wikipedia, right? Jason 03:01, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep One of the things that makes wikipedia great is its inclusion of various "internet phenomena" such as Numa Numa and The Star Wars Kid. As this seems no different, I certainly think it should be kept. -- unsigned vote by Jingman (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep It serves a valid role in the debate over intelligent design in the science classroom. Grant-o 00:23, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep I think that satire is a powerful and legitimate way to seriously critique the Kansas decision to include ID in the curriculum and that "Pastafarianism" should be allowed to stand in the Wikipedia. -- unsigned vote by 24.80.166.229 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep Even if its not a real religion or anything thereof, it is now apart of internet culture. -- unsigned vote by 69.231.226.37 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep It's a quality piece. -- unsigned vote by 129.120.43.165 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep This is now a part of net lore and has as much of a right to be here as the Invisible Pink Unicorn -- unsigned vote by 217.43.118.253 (talk · contribs); user's 32nd edit
- Keep It is an accurate and factual article that is referenced in mainstream journalism (http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/online/archives/2005/08/20/intelligent_design_and_pastafarianism.html) --CYBAEA Cybaea (talk · contribs)'s second edit
- Keep The article reports accurately that FSM and Pastafarianism are parodies. It does not present them, unlike Uncyclopedia would, as real. --Drauh Drauh (talk · contribs)'s 29th/30th edit
- Delete. Wikipedia is not Uncyclopedia. --MicroFeet 06:01, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep It looks like it's on its way to becoming a decent Wikipedia article. --Barista | a/k/a マイケル | T/C 06:02, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep There are plenty of other Internet phenomena covered on Wikipedia. The article will not turn into an Uncyclopedia article as long as editors do their best to keep the article encyclopedic (See relevant discussion on Talk:Flying Spaghetti Monster).-Loren 06:10, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Merge into Creation and evolution in public education if it's a good fit there; otherwise, Keep. Notable parody, and it's not just a parody for the sake of parody, although it may seem so at first glance. android79 06:11, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Lullabye Muse 06:18, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Notable phenomenon with political/religious background (although I'd vote Keep even if it were just fluff, based on wide notability). MCB 06:19, 20 August 2005 (UTC) MCB (talk · contribs)'s 30th edit
- keep --Irpen 06:32, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep The originator of the FSM is apparently serious about taking the Kansas School Board to court if FSMism is not given equal time. This lends further credence to the points brought up by 69.110.2.83. moof Dogcow (talk · contribs)'s 20th edit
- Keep. This is a fun little article. Capitalistroadster 07:04, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Oh please. Cleduc 07:16, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. It is a very good parody, worthy of a page. --Nate3000 07:17, 20 August 2005 (UTC) Nate3000 (talk · contribs)'s 29th edit
- Keep Notable. Important. Hilarious. --jenlight 07:21, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep --Jack (Cuervo) 07:31, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep agree fully with capitalroadster Aleichem 07:35, 20 August 2005 (UTC). BTW, the article is in dutch also.
- Keep agree with Android79 and several others --Jrssystemsnet 07:37, 20 August 2005 (UTC) Jrssystemsnet (talk · contribs)'s fifth edit
- Keep. There are lots of articles discussing bits of geek folklore and humor; this fits in just fine. Evan 07:41, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Notable, part of a well known religious and political controversy and a funny parody.BrendanRyan 08:10, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Although a "light-hearted" topic, it is based on genuine concern surrounding the "for and against" in an argument that has ostensibly been going on since the Scopes Monkey Trial. As such, I think there is meritage in keepage. If other internet phenomena such as All Your Base Are Belong To Us have found a home on Wikipedia, then there is room for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism as well Sirimiri 08:16, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, for what it's worth (the vote is leaning pretty heavy one way as of right now). It's a good article about a valid parody religion, like Discordianism. Gaurav 08:28, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Years from now, when all the ID/Evolution drama subsides, cultural anthropologists will find this article informative. It truly reflects the ethos of our time. --Cioxx 09:09, 20 August 2005 (UTC) Cioxx (talk · contribs)'s 22nd edit
- Keep on the condition that the article be made more objective and less stupid. In particular, the irrelevant minutiae of this "religion" decribed in excruciating detail at Flying Spaghetti Monster#The One True Monster need to be removed. If this article is just going to be a clone of the uncyclopedia version, then it is redundant and ought to be deleted. --Ardonik.talk()* 09:23, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Contains information about a serious political and cultural protest. --JonasGalvez — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonasgalvez (talk • contribs) 10:09, 20 August 2005 (UTC) Jonas Galvez (talk · contribs)'s third edit
- Keep -- Longhair | Talk 13:18, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. This is bullshit but if it's notable as an internet joke then rewrite the article. --Sleepyhead 14:41, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. There are 43,800 google hits for it. It will take careful editing to keep it from becoming Uncyclopedic, but a lot of people are interested in it now, hopefully it can stay/turn into a good wikipedia entry. -Interiot 14:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. For all the reasons above. Moncrief 15:55, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep - Omegatron 16:01, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep I find it notable in my opinion. It's like a modern update to A Modest Proposal. --TheKoG 16:24, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Delete. It looks like the consensus is keep, of course. But while FGM is totally hilarious and awesome, these are not criteria for inclusion. As far as I can tell, FGM has not made any major newspapers and is mostly a fad among liberal/lefty blogs. I doubt FGM will be notable in six months. Please note that "flying spagetti monster" gets 473 hits on google [1]. Sdedeo 16:44, 20 August 2005 (UTC)- You misspelled spaghetti. "flying spaghetti monster" gets 47,600 hits. android79 16:53, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- And [Google News shows two major newspapers have picked up on this story recently. android79 17:21, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- I apologize for my faith based spelling. Weak Keep Sdedeo 17:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep - we have Invisible Pink Unicorn, why not this too? — ceejayoz ★ .com 16:46, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep - Nothing unencyclopedic about this article - for an encyclopedia posted on the bloody internet, it only seems natural to have entries on internet phenomena :\. hiffy 12:57, 20 August 2005 (UTC -5) Hif (talk · contribs)'s 38th edit
- Keep. If its notability fades later, as some have suggested it will, it can be merged to Invisible Pink Unicorn. -- Antaeus Feldspar 16:53, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. cprompt 17:22, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Sean Bonner Sean Bonner (talk · contribs)'s 28th edit
- Keep. I agree with the above statements. --68.50.237.89 17:46, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. It's related to significant current events. --Brouhaha 18:22, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. See above. -Hoekenheef 18:28, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, for at least the next year. The issue may be worth reconsidering after that; Pastafarianism may not prove to be as durable a joke religion as The Church of the Subgenius, Discordianism, or the Church of the Invisible Pink Unicorn. If it sparks and dies, re-examine the issue. However, the FSM has been recieving mainstream (back page) news coverage in items touching on the Intelligent Design debate. It furthermore has distinct elements which make it difficult to merge back in with either Invisible Pink Unicorn or Intelligent Design. Mind you, the article should be WATCHED closely by the more cynical, as there is too great a likelihood of NPOV assertions creeping in to pose as fact, especially from Pastafarians who think Wikipedia is the proper place for expounding their recently received divine revelations: Wikipedia is not a propaganda machine. But reporting the facts of this tongue-in-cheek movement seems appropriate: keep it. Abb3w 21:24, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep --Schultkl 21:38, 20 August 2005 (UTC) This is AndreTorrez (talk · contribs)'s third and fourth edit.
Dunc|☺ 21:40, 20 August 2005 (UTC)Yes, I managed to sign my name without voting (oops!). Anyway, keep (though I myself prefer the Invisible Pink Unicorn pbuh, the idea that She is the only deity capable of crushing believers beneath her holy hooves is blasphemy! The spaghetti monster can help by spaghterreizing them, or something. Dunc|☺ 17:05, 21 August 2005 (UTC)- 'Keep' Agree that it fits neatly in the category Internet Phenomenon. One that goes way beyond the scope of this single article. It's deletion would only be a disservice to those may have heard of it in passing and seek a communal description. No different than All Your Base Are Belong To Us Vote actually placed by 67.177.33.245 (talk · contribs)
- Keep While you may or may not agree with the point of view that the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" is intended to parody, this article does not actually advocate that point of view. It merely explains a currently widely known cultural phenomenon. A reader wishing to find out what the noise is about, can read this page and gain understanding. The article also contains useful links regarding the creation/evolution debate as it affects public education in the U.S. I urge that it stay. - 69.110.2.83 06:10, 20 August 2005
- Keep69.139.157.41 06:23, 20 August 2005 (UTC) 69.139.157.41 (talk · contribs)'s only edit.
- merge into Intelligent design. failing that keep. editing out non-pc entries smacks too much of revisionism — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.227.243.179 (talk • contribs) 06:37, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- keep this entry supports an internet meme and dose not attempt to convert readers but rater inform on the topic at hand much like entries of lime cat or clock spider 11:46, 20 August 2005 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.162.107 (talk • contribs) 06:47, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep It may in time be recognised as an Open Source Deity — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.58.117 (talk • contribs) 07:48, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep I see no reason why having an article on this topic is any different than having an article about Landover Baptist Church or A Modest Proposal --jarquet (64.238.164.115) 07:44, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep --68.145.7.237 07:51, 20 August 2005 (UTC)parody is not sufficient reason for exclusion of a cultural/social phenonmena. If the purpose of this site is to maintain a repository of knowledge, and one that goes beyond the regular boundaries of academia, then this is certainly a worthwile entry to keep.--68.145.7.237 07:51, 20 August 2005 (UTC) 68.145.7.237 (talk · contribs)'s only edit
- Keep While the Flying Spaghetti Monster theory is in demand, the article should stay. Many people have never heard about this and want to find out about this cultural phenomenon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.97.126.191 (talk • contribs) 08:39, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep It's a serious and informative article. Damn funny too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.177.27.208 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Informative article about a parody, worth keeping. 219.89.137.185 12:04, 20 August 2005 (UTC) 219.89.137.185 (talk · contribs)'s only edit
- Keep Worth keeping, provides insight into a widely referred-to cultural phenomenon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.206.161.63 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Entertaining, and obiviously self aware — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.75.245.49 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Although it is humorous, and the concept behind it is clearly designed to garner a chuckle, it does show a legitimate point of view in the creationism-evolution debate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.48.127 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep How dare you insult my religion? There are pages on other religions, why not this one? --Crgn 11:27, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- User's first contribution to Wikipedia
- Keep This looks like a serious political movement that has already begun. The quality of the artwork depicted not only shows the integrity of the followers, it venerates the movement's purpose. Let's not delete it, lets make it more objective. The Flying Spaghetti Monster should have a page like Jesus and we should site both sides of the argument for and against the Flying Spaghetti Monster Movement.Larrykom 12:10, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- User's first contribution to Wikipedia
- Keep We need this if we have that. Skunkape 14:27, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- User's first contribution to Wikipedia
- Keep The article's tone seems to condone the message of FSM, and should be distanced. However, this is a widespread social occurance that should be noted here. --RyanBrush 15:53, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- User's first contribution to Wikipedia
- Keep Please keep this interesting article. I really enjoyed reading it. Additionally, it describes a real faith system (even if contrived and unpopular). People seeking information about Flying Spaghetti Monsterism will likely have their questions answered by this informative and professionally-written article. (Plus it's fun to read!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.49.199.145 (talk • contribs) 16:30, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep I agree with the above statements. Some people, may we pass no judgements, take very seriously an attack upon Flying Spaghetti Monsterism.--68.50.237.89 17:41, 20 August 2005 (UTC) 68.50.237.89 (talk · contribs)'s first and second edits
- Keep Makes perfect sense to me. You just have to have faith in the noodle. -- unsigned vote by 68.239.89.234 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep. [X] all of the above. What's a better reflection of the zeitgeist than Pastafarianism? -- unsigned vote by buzcarter (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep. It's as valid of a parody as any other (see Discordia or SubGenius); placing it within the same article as Intelligent Design would be inflamatory, but linking to it within the article's "See Also" section would be a useful way of typifying reactions to the legal decision. TerrorsMartyr 18:08, 20 August 2005 (UTC) TerrorsMartyr (talk · contribs)'s third and fourth edits
- Keep. Would like to see more relevant information about results of FSM: legal actions, public responses, etc. -wnallen at gmail dot com 14:10, 20 August 2005 (CST) -- by 66.68.91.136 (talk · contribs); user's only two edits
- Keep The article is accurate, and FSM-ism is now well known enough to deserve coverage on Wikipedia. --foobar There is no Injeted-noaccount (talk · contribs); this is actually the only edit of 24.107.179.76 (talk · contribs)
- Keep: the article is accurate, the subject is notable, and there's been enough press coverage as of late to make it something worth covering here. Jason 21:54, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep: AndreTorrez 22:03, 20 August 2005 (UTC) This is AndreTorrez (talk · contribs)'s thirteenth edit.
- Keep: Simply no valid basis for deletion. The article records and details a relevant social phenomenon, which is what an encyclopedia does. The argument that the phenomenon will no longer be popular in a few months is ridiculous, since the whole point of keeping a record is for reference when a things popularity and its easily accessable resources have vanished. Further, deletion requests are clearly coming largely from biased entities who take issue with the idea more than the entry.Michael 20 August 2005 (UTC) There is no Vendor X (talk · contribs); this is actually the only edit of 69.230.188.94 (talk · contribs)
- "Keep": Its funny, and its a valid internet in Joke. -- unsigned vote by 212.2.170.158 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- "Keep": God says it's the truth, so leave it in. God is always right, right? -- unsigned vote by 24.161.47.42 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep to quote User:Radman1, "the sockpuppets are right." Notable parody deity like Invisible Pink Unicorn. CanadianCaesar 23:13, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep: A lot less ridiculous than the thought of young-earth creationism becoming part of science class. Should demonic possession be studied during psychology courses, next? -- unsigned vote by Oacoombes (talk · contribs); user's 13th edit
- Keep: People would want to look it up. So keep it. brandnewbrain 23:23, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep: The Flying Spaghetti Monster designed me to vote keep on this entry. Nandesuka 23:26, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: Why are people still voting? It is an obvious keep. There is no need to continue to create so many wasted sockpuppet accounts that are going to vote once, and then never make another single solitary edit to Wikipedia ever again. Func( t, c, @, ) 23:31, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Comment. Seriously! We're going to keep the damned article already. Stop registering useless accounts and wasting our time with fake votes; no one will fall for it. Go back to the uncyclopedia if you have nothing to contribute here. --Ardonik.talk()* 23:51, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep: Internet phenomenon. Plus, it'd be hard to justify deleting this while the Invisible Pink Unicorn is still around. Ubernostrum 23:43, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep: the fact that I agree with this mock religion's creators is not important in any way; this article documents an existing (Internet) phenomenon, and as such is useful and more than worthy to stay. --positron 00:27, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep: Not only is it a parody of an actual public debate (creationism v. evolution)and real event (the writing of the protest letter to the Kansas School Board) but to take it down, you'd also have to take down IPU among others. Besides, if you don't, you'll be branded as having a conservative bias by all the liberal bloggers out there, not to mention the bad publicity from BoingBoing and Fark which would just cause a rather large mess as popular outcry to keep Pastafarianism (as it's also known) alive. --joellevand 00:27, 21 August 2005 (UTC) This vote actually added by 12.76.67.108 (talk · contribs), whose only edit this is. joellevand (talk · contribs) has twenty-four votes, all made on one of four different dates.
- Keep: Pastafarians may just be the answer to the Fristinization of America. -- unsigned vote by 66.159.229.137 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep: The article clearly identifies that it's a parody religion, and explains how, why and for what purpose. That it explains its made-up tenets is only in keeping with all the other religion-based entries, such as Zoroastrianism. -- unsigned vote by 63.205.115.25 (talk · contribs); user's seventh edit
- Keep: Every voice must be heard {chetchow proclaims) -- unsigned vote by 67.113.244.106 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- KEEP: If not for this article I would not have had the pleasure of knowing the Flying Spaghetti Monster -- unsigned vote by 71.116.187.184 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- KEEP: The flying spaghetti monster is real. What's all the fuss about? I vote to keep him -- unsigned vote by 66.158.195.32 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- KEEP: This is a true internet phenomenon and deserves it's space in the wikipedia.65.184.102.35 02:27, 21 August 2005 (UTC) -- 65.184.102.35 (talk · contribs)'s second and third edit
- Keep. Notable. -maclean25 02:37, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- KEEP: Removal would be discriminatory against Pastafarians. Seriously though, I really think this thing has legs (the religion, not the FSM). -- unsigned vote by 66.8.185.70 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep The truth must not be hidden! -User:shift82 -- shift82 (talk · contribs)'s third edit
- Delete or Merge as suggested above. This could be used by Wikipedia's detractors against us. It is factual though. Merge it somewhere. --Philosophistry 03:58, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
--64.54.250.128 05:17, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Part of internet culture, mainstream-ish media and a valid piece in the creationsism versus evolution debate. Especially the million dollars on offer for proof that this is not the godshead, as a counter to the $2500000 on offer for proof of evolution. -- unsigned vote by 80.213.187.73 (talk · contribs); user's fourth edit
- Keep as genuine parody. --Agamemnon2 11:17, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- Not so much Keep as don't censor -- unsigned vote by 62.252.128.18 (talk · contribs)
- Keep - important not only for comedy but for a viable argument about religion as a whole. Encyclopedic and verifiable. Just make sure it stays encyclopedic and doesn't go making silly statements as we've seen in some of the recent vandalism. -- unsigned vote by EatMyShortz (talk · contribs)
- Keep : deletion kind of makes the original author's point. This page is just as viable and worthy as any other page on religion. -- unsigned vote by 81.86.124.195 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep And bring back clock spider. -- unsigned vote by 81.86.124.195 (talk · contribs); user's third edit
- Keep This is an informative article about an actual phenomenon that is clearly under attack by religious idealogues, who keep trying to delete it. Should be locked for a period until these vandalism attacks cease. -- unsigned vote by 66.108.220.146 (talk · contribs); user's only edit
- Keep, sufficiently notable (50,400 googles). But troutslap all above anons. ~~ N (t/c) 16:18, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Is a legitimate political satire movement. - grubber 19:08, 2005 August 21 (UTC)
- Keep. Noteable enough to keep. The Zaniak 19:50, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. I agree with Grubber. Malo 19:51, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. It's a real religion if people believe it. Does Christianity Have a page? I think so!
- Keep or, failing that, merge with intelligent design. This seems to have attracted some mainstream attention and therefore is probably notable. If it's forgotten in six-months then we can simply have this discussion again and merge it with something or delete it as appropriate. That said, I'm far from sure the current edit conforms with POV guidelines. That's easy enough to change, though. Disillusioned kid 21:00, 21 August 2005 (UTC)