Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forward (Obama–Biden campaign slogan)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 152.85.8.33 (talk) at 18:06, 2 May 2012 (→Forward (Obama-Biden Campaign Slogan)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Forward (Obama-Biden Campaign Slogan)

Forward (Obama-Biden Campaign Slogan) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • KEEP Anything else would be just show the bias of a site suppsed to be open and honest.
  • KEEP Such a sudden move to remove this reeks of bias and merely serves to confirm the perception about the reliability and accuracy of articles on Wikipaedia. Given that this wiki article on Rick Santorum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santorum_(neologism)#Reception_and_political_impact) contains a personally motivated attack by Dan Savage, where is the outcry to remove this? Is "that frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex."[8][15] newsworthy, whereas the Obama Administration choosing a campaign slogon traditionally associated with socialism is not? The fact that we're even having this discussion speaks to the skewed, partisan nature of wikipaedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.134.37.3 (talk • contribs)

DO NOT DELETE -- Just because some people don't like the message doesn't mean that it should be removed from everyone's access. Isn't that what Wikipedia is all about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.73.44.10 (talk) 17:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep! It shows the relation of like minds with like agendas..which is why it was put under the politic heading in the first place— Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.17.32.194 (talk • contribs)
  • Keep! Wikipedia articles so long as they are not infringing on copy right or violating any laws should not be deleted. Edited for accuracy perhaps but not deleted because they are an Inconvenient truth.
  • Delete—"Other stuff doesn't exist" doesn't work any more than WP:OSE does, but the end result is the same. Delete, since there's nothing worth merging right now. The proper place for this is, indeed, in the campaign article. Livit⇑Eh?/What? 16:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete This doesn't even rise to WP:DICDEF level. --BDD (talk) 17:01, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:43, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete per nom. & others. Clearly fails WP:GNG. Redirecting to Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2012 might be considered, should a few more secondary sources surface, but definitely does not merit a stand-alone article.--JayJasper (talk) 20:07, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Anything that needs to be written about the slogan can be incorporated into Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2012, rather than existing as its own article. Peacock (talk) 20:13, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per the above. A redirect doesn't really work, as this is an unlikely search term. But we should still see if there is a redirect that does make sense here. I also don't think this makes it to Speedy Deletion; what criteria does it meet? UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 20:21, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Wikipedia is exactly the place for compilation of facts on relevant topics, including politics. Value of an electronic encyclopedia is that it can quickly tie together such facts, rather than wait until next year's edition. Thus, move forward. In the weeks ahead there will be many students investigating this topic who would never have seen the historical connection between this 21st century slogan and its parallel use by earlier statist regimes on other continents.Jhacklem (talk) 17:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]

Too soon to delete. This topic is undoubtedly going to be developing a history over the next week or two. Either the Obama campaign wants to be associated with a Socialist shibboleth or they have committed a political blunder. Either way there is going to be some reporting to be done on this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.178.75.196 (talk) 20:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC) [reply]

  • Keep & edit, edit, edit, edit. It now can include so many Wisconsin items, per Rachel Anne Maddow, wonderful. Save the page. Also: « Toyota: Moving forward with America  », @ 200 miles per hour, over a cliff, with the accelerator & brake pedal stuck,..... hopiakuta Please do sign your communiqué .~~Thank You, DonFphrnqTaub Persina. 02:13, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
  • DO NOT DELETE; KEEP all information related to FORWARD as it is current and accurate as well as adding the usage by Obama-Biden, the American people have the right to know the facts as they play out and become history. The Socialist movement in the United States must be recorded for historical purposes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.189.80.77 (talk) 14:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

* INCLUDE DO NOT DELETE; Do not succumb to the Political pressures or it will just take away from the credibility of Wikipedia completely. The main stream news has already become tainted and not trusted by the vast majority of the U.S. citizens as well as citizens from other countries when polled. PLEASE DO NOT FOLLOW IN THIER FOOTSTEPS...DO NOT DELETE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.189.80.77 (talk) 14:55, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • SENSOR should actually be a choice here, after all thats what most of the folks that are commenting to DELETE or even SPEEDY DELETE what is that? SPEEDY DELETE,is that like "hurry up get rid of it quick" why? What's the big deal, it's not as though we live our lives from everything that we read here, we are not talking about adding something to the Constitution or the Bible and Wikipedia has the right to modify, change, add anything they like at any time so why not just leave it alone and allow the current association to be made since there are many people who believe that very thing. That there is a strong tie between Obama and Socialism, it's not some secret, if you think it is well, cats's out of the bag. REDISTRIBUTION or wealth is Socialist period and Obama, Biden. Pelosi, Reid, Clinton and a host of others in the current administration state publicly that they not only think redistribution of weath is a good thing, they support and promote it in there legslation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.189.80.77 (talk) 15:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This topic is separate from the general workings of the Obama 2012 campaign. The article references an attempt to link a historical meme with a current political push. That linkage, or lack thereof, is separate from the Obama campaign's statements about the President, his record, etc., all of which are suitable for inclusion in the campaign article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.176.235.154 (talk) 15:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • SENSOR SHOULD BE A CHOICE SENSOR should actually be a choice here, after all that’s what most of the folks that are commenting to DELETE or even SPEEDY DELETE what is that? SPEEDY DELETE, is that like "hurry up get rid of it quick" why? What's the big deal, it's not as though we live our lives from everything that we read here, we are not talking about adding something to the Constitution or the Bible and Wikipedia has the right to modify, change, add anything they like at any time so why not just leave it alone and allow the current association to be made since there are many people who believe that very thing. That there is a strong tie between Obama and Socialism, it's not some secret, if you think it is well, cats’ out of the bag. REDISTRIBUTION of wealth is Socialist period and Obama, Biden. Pelosi, Reid, Clinton and a host of others in the current administration state publicly that they not only think redistribution of wealth is a good thing, they support and promote it in there legislation. (New here so please accept my appoligies for the report, wanted to add signature) John.ryff (talk) 15:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy DeleteWe at wikipedia cannot allow any hint of socialism linked to Barack Obama, a great and magnificent president. It is the duty of Wikipedia to maintain left wing bias (per a systemic bias of white, mostly left wing young authors). It would not be in our best interest to keep any article that induces negative thoughts about the Mighty Barack Obama. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.195.49.73 (talk) 15:45, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP: The "Forward" slogan for the Obama/Biden 2012 campaign appears to be factual as does the use of the word "Forward" in Communist or Marxist-Socialist publications today and in the past, ergo inclusion within Wikipedia is justified and exclusion/sensorship or removal would appear to be politically motivated and go against the principles of freedom of speech which Wikipedia promotes. If this information were factually incorrect, removal would be justified.

(http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/30/news/la-pn-obama-campaign-video-forward-20120430) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WbQe-wVK9E) (http://blogs.reuters.com/talesfromthetrail/2012/04/30/obama-campaign-reveals-new-slogan-forward/) (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57424018-503544/obamas-2012-campaign-pitch-forward/) (http://www.boortz.com/weblogs/nealz-nuze/2012/may/02/proggies-muck-wikipedia/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.233.2 (talk) 15:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • KEEP: Deleters: censorship is a slippery slope (say that 5 times fast - but its true. Don't be afraid of the truth)

    — Preceding unsigned comment added by CerpherJoe (talk • contribs) This template must be substituted.


  • KEEP all information related to FORWARD as it is current and a relevant discussion.; If you delete this slogan, then that would set the precedent to delete all campaign slogans of any type, and there are many Wiki entries. That's censorship. Keep Wikipedia about fact and not political opinion.Halin805 (talk) 16:12, 2 May 2012 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]
  • Speedy Delete no relevance, no connection, no citation to make genuine connections, just random connections of arbitrary words to create a link for another political campaign. John Kerry V George W Bush "Flip-flopping" primarily because most of the arguments for keeping state that obama is a socialist as a means at making him look bad means that it violates WP:NPOV and sadly it cannot be salvaged. Jarunasax (talk) 16:14, 2 May 2012 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]
  • KEEP Wikipedia is supposed to be FREE speech, without political manipulation. Don't let the far-left silence the truth because they simply do not like it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.79.204.118 (talk • contribs)
  • Keep Controversy over this slogan has made it notable on its own, unlike most campaign slogans. Vegasprof (talk) 16:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Fringe caterwauling by Rush Limbaugh and NewsMax don't really count towards notability, sorry. Tarc (talk) 16:40, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment By attempting to marginalize the most-listened to radio program in the entire nation through referring to it as "fringe", you reveal your bias.--William Thweatt Talk | Contribs 17:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move - A (referenced) discussion on the use of the word "Forward" as a political slogan would be appropriate. Use in the Obama campaign and its implications (or lack thereof) could be discussed, but its use in the Obama campaign as the subject of an entire article is too narrow. No speedy delete, and no keep, and no left or right wing rants. PAR (talk) 16:37, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - part of a particularly obvious effort to tie a single word in the English language, the state motto of Scott Walker's own Wisconsin among other things, to eviallll commynism, and thus to smear the Eisenhower Republican Obama as a commie. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep At first blush, I leaned toward deleting this, but it has indeed taken on a life of its own making it, for the moment, notable. Should the subject fizzle out, or the campaign not push this aspect any further, the question of deletion can be revisited.--William Thweatt Talk | Contribs 17:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy or delete without prejudice - political wranglings aside, the topic is article-worthy, but the article as it stands is absurdly useless. Stubs are fine when an article is being started, but not when they are high visibility and used for political points. --B (talk) 17:03, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP BECAUSE OF PROMINENT NOTE BY NOTABLE RIGHT-WING NEWS AGGREGATOR DRUDGE REPORT ("WIKIPEDIA mulls deleting entry on Obama-Biden slogan...") --34C34C (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]
  • KEEP - I'm unsure why there's such a quick move to delete in this case when many private citizens have had such a hard time removing disparraging content they've "discovered" about themselves on wiki. This move to delete, or even suggest deletion, reeks of bias and only confirms suspicions about the validity and/or truthfulness of the articles on wikipaedia. Just because content may be offensive to some is not an excuse to censor it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.134.37.3 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 2 May 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP I am seeing references to this slogan all over the news and whether it is stays the major slogan of a political campaign or not, the history of this slogan and the choice of it is notewothy. Deleting this would hide an important context of the slogan and its history. Its as if a major campaign chose the slogan Arbeit macht frei and we deleted the article showing how it was previously used. I came here specifically to get info on previous use of this slogan after reading about it in the news and was shocked that some are attempting to delete it. SHAME! 216.178.108.235 (talk) 17:13, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Everybody Calm Down Section Break (Full Protection)

  • Comment. Please can we have a cup of coffee and relax. There's no chance of this discussion being closed early - there are too many editors commenting, and too many varied opinions. But please remember, the Articles for Deletion process is driven by consensus, not a count of the votes for Keep vs Delete vs whatever. If you believe this should be kept (or deleted), please make a reasoned statement saying why. Linking that reason to Wikipedia's policies is useful as well. Reasons that don't apply policies are less likely to be persuasive. Copy-pasting previous responses will be even less persuasive. This is intended to be a debate, so debate the article and the subject on the merits please. Thank you. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 17:12, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Tea sounds good. There is no relevant modern controversy that exist the only controversy is the original paper having most of it's editors arrested in the 1800's there is no current relevance.Jarunasax (talk) 17:33, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP Based solely on the choice of "Forward" by President Obama dn his campaign, the phrase "Forward" is now becoming a meme. References are appearing across media today, and it is a slogan which has clearly become a touchstone for political, cultural, and media/internet rights debate. If this entry succumbs then we should probably clean out the other 10% of Wikipedia entries which have much less visibility and impact. Floyddabarber (talk)Floyddabarber 18:29 2 May 2012 (UTC) This template must be substituted.
  • Do Not Delete Isn't it ironic that people are trying to politically censor the democratic party's campaign slogan. How embarrassingly undemocratic of the democrats. Let the people know the facts so they can represent the democracy with their votes. All Americans should be against censorship, stop putting your party above the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.70.222.31 (talk) 17:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Nothing worth merging here, either; and we need to keep an eye on the SPA's. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 17:37, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if you take out the SPAs and unsigned comments, you're pretty much left with a bunch of experienced editors agreeing that this is an utterly absurd debate to be having.JoelWhy (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete- political spam, utterly non-notable. Same goes for any slogan, any party, any campaign, any country. Appalled. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:39, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • redirect to 2012 election campaign page, where it can have a section, including the negative information and links to socialism etc. neither "Hope and change" or "Yes we can" have standalone pages, and both were widely covered. Additionally Yes we can has the same linkage ("si se puede") so is almost a perfect analogue Gaijin42 (talk) 17:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Forward_(Obama–Biden_campaign_slogan)&oldid=490332844"