Talk:You are a communist
(Difference between revisions)
| (One intermediate revision by one user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:I dunno. I agree that it is an ad hominem, but the supposed "link between atheism and communism", or that "communism is atheism in practice", comes up so often that I think it does justify its own page. I will say that I think it should be worded and laid out allot better than it currently is.--[[User:Murphy|Murphy]] 23:29, 29 December 2009 (CST) | :I dunno. I agree that it is an ad hominem, but the supposed "link between atheism and communism", or that "communism is atheism in practice", comes up so often that I think it does justify its own page. I will say that I think it should be worded and laid out allot better than it currently is.--[[User:Murphy|Murphy]] 23:29, 29 December 2009 (CST) | ||
::Popularity doesn't mean there's a lot to say about it. If there's a "stub-worthy" amount to say about a certain special case, we could create a sub-heading "Special Cases" or "Examples" under [[Argumentum ad hominem]], and then if some day that section (or any single special case) grows sufficiently to justify a separate page, separate it at that point. I'd vote to delete --[[User:Jaban|Jaban]] 12:40, 30 December 2009 (CST) | ::Popularity doesn't mean there's a lot to say about it. If there's a "stub-worthy" amount to say about a certain special case, we could create a sub-heading "Special Cases" or "Examples" under [[Argumentum ad hominem]], and then if some day that section (or any single special case) grows sufficiently to justify a separate page, separate it at that point. I'd vote to delete --[[User:Jaban|Jaban]] 12:40, 30 December 2009 (CST) | ||
| + | :::Should probably be redirected to [[Ad hominem]]. - [[User:Soulkeeper|Soulkeeper]] 22:50, 2 January 2010 (CST) | ||
| + | :::I disagree. This is a specific claim I've both personally heard as well as heard theist callers on The Atheist Experience claim. Combining "X, Y, Z were atheists" into one article would seem a far higher priority than this. --[[User:ExistentialEnso|ExistentialEnso]] | ||
Revision as of 00:34, 4 January 2010
I vote to delete this page. It seems like a special case of Argumentum ad hominem. --Arensb 20:46, 29 December 2009 (CST)
- I dunno. I agree that it is an ad hominem, but the supposed "link between atheism and communism", or that "communism is atheism in practice", comes up so often that I think it does justify its own page. I will say that I think it should be worded and laid out allot better than it currently is.--Murphy 23:29, 29 December 2009 (CST)
- Popularity doesn't mean there's a lot to say about it. If there's a "stub-worthy" amount to say about a certain special case, we could create a sub-heading "Special Cases" or "Examples" under Argumentum ad hominem, and then if some day that section (or any single special case) grows sufficiently to justify a separate page, separate it at that point. I'd vote to delete --Jaban 12:40, 30 December 2009 (CST)
- Should probably be redirected to Ad hominem. - Soulkeeper 22:50, 2 January 2010 (CST)
- I disagree. This is a specific claim I've both personally heard as well as heard theist callers on The Atheist Experience claim. Combining "X, Y, Z were atheists" into one article would seem a far higher priority than this. --ExistentialEnso
- Popularity doesn't mean there's a lot to say about it. If there's a "stub-worthy" amount to say about a certain special case, we could create a sub-heading "Special Cases" or "Examples" under Argumentum ad hominem, and then if some day that section (or any single special case) grows sufficiently to justify a separate page, separate it at that point. I'd vote to delete --Jaban 12:40, 30 December 2009 (CST)
