Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:01, 22 January 2017

January 19

Category:Kangta

• Propose deleting Category:Kangta - Template:Lc1
  

Nominator's rationale: Simply not enough content to warrant an eponymous category per WP:OCEPON as Category:Kangta albums is enough to hold all related articles. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars 19:58, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

• Keep, filled - this was one of my cat red link attacks, not sure what happened as I'm normally pretty sensitive to overcategorisation and usually try to fill out these kinds of categories. Which I've now done a bit, although I suspect that part of the problem is that being perhaps the Korean equivalent of Gary Barlow not all the articles that should be there actually exist yet. Anyway, it should be full enough now to stand on its own merits.Le Deluge (talk) 11:40, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Category:Persecution by atheists

• Propose deleting Category:Persecution by atheists - Template:Lc1
  

Nominator's rationale: The category has been emptied by User:Xenophrenic who indicated would be willing share a list of the content that was removed from the category. As nominator I do not have an opinion about the pros or cons of deletion of the category yet, because I don't exactly remember what was in the category to begin with. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:34, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Co-nominator's rationale: The category fails WP:OCEGRS which states: If a substantial and encyclopedic head article (not just a list) cannot be written for such a category, then the category should not be created. For example, Category:LGBT murderers. Such categories attempt to misleadingly convey a causative correlation. Attempts to create a head article have been made before, usually resulting in this: Historical persecution by atheism or Historical persecution by atheists (see deletion discussion 1 and deletion discussion 2), and it is hard not to view the creation of this problematic category as an end-run around past community consensus. In addition, the category fails WP:CATDEF, which states: Categorization must also maintain a neutral point of view. Categorizations appear on article pages without annotations or referencing to justify or explain their addition; editors should be conscious of the need to maintain a neutral point of view when creating categories or adding them to articles. Categorizations should generally be uncontroversial; if the category's topic is likely to spark controversy, then a list article (which can be annotated and referenced) is probably more appropriate. As will be seen in the ensuing discussions below, creating a category to imply religious persecution is an attribute of atheism is anything but uncontroversial. Xenophrenic (talk) 18:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

• Note for reviewing administrator: Up until now, every single comment made here has been in favour of keeping this category and opposing its deletion. However, User:Xenophrenic just made a request on the atheism article User:Xenophrenic was blocked this past Autumn for edit warring against User:Ramos1990 and blanking sections about atheism for historical articles involving the persecution of Christians under the militant state atheism of the USS. Thanks Thanks.- Thanks.--Jobas (talk) 20:49, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Note for nominator per CfD instructions - After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors. (Rather than directly pinging several editors with known POVs.)

Well sound you forgot that you directly pinging User:Knowledgebattle, who is known POVs.--Jobas (talk) 22:21, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

The Historical persecution by atheism (see deletion discussion was from 10 years ago (in 2007), Well it's wikilawyering. At the time of the 2007 decision, there was no notability criterion for stand-alone lists (see this version of Misplaced Pages:Notability).--Jobas (talk) 20:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

What are you goin on about? This discussion is about a category nominated for deletion. Xenophrenic (talk) 22:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

• History: It appears this problematic category may have been created to make a point. After a couple months of dispute and edit-warring between User:Jobas and User:Knowledgebattle over "Persecution" categories, with each accusing the other of stalking edits and harassment, Jobas declared, "Yes we got your idea that you throw in every place christians are evils and atheist are damn peacfull people, you can express your opinion without attacks." Jobas created Category:Persecution by Atheists on November 10, 2015, and populated it with the following articles, sometimes adding 4 or 5 per minute, which tells me that no attention was paid to the applicability of the category to the article:

1922 confiscation of Russian Orthodox Church property‎
233 Spanish Martyrs
498 Spanish Martyrs
522 Spanish Martyrs
Acerrimo Moerore
Ad Apostolorum principis
Agustín Caloca Cortés
Anacleto González Flores
Anti-Catholicism in the Soviet Union
Anti-religious campaign during the Russian Civil War
Cambodian genocide
Category:Anti-clericalism
Category:Anti-religious campaign in the Soviet Union
Category:Cristero War
Category:Demolished churches in the Soviet Union
Catholicism in the Second Spanish Republic
Chronicle of the Catholic Church in Lithuania
Cristero War
Dechristianization of France during the French Revolution
Dominic Tang
Eastern Catholic victims of Soviet persecutions
Enver Hoxha
Eugene Bossilkov
Islam in Tajikistan
Islam in the Soviet Union
Jaime Hilario Barbal
Jenaro Sánchez Delgadillo
Josef Beran‎
José Sánchez del Río
League of Militant Atheists
Marguerite Rutan
Martyrs of the Spanish Civil War
Martyrs of Turon
Martyrs of Daimiel
Marxist–Leninist atheism
Mateo Correa Magallanes
Meminisse iuvat
Miguel Pro
Operation North
Persecution of Buddhists
Persecution of Christians
Persecution of Christians in Mexico
Persecution of Christians in the Eastern Bloc
Persecution of Christians in the Soviet Union
Persecutions of the Catholic Church and Pius XII
Pietro Leoni
Polish anti-religious campaign
Red Shirts (Mexico)
Red Terror (Spain)
Refractory clergy
Religious persecution in Communist Romania
Saints of the Cristero War
Severian Baranyk
Soviet anti-religious legislation
State Secretary for Church Affairs
Temple of Reason
Three Martyrs of Chimbote
Tomás Garrido Canabal
USSR anti-religious campaign (1970s–87)
USSR anti-religious campaign (1958–64)
USSR anti-religious campaign (1928–41)
USSR anti-religious campaign (1921–28)
Walter Ciszek
Zynoviy Kovalyk

The problematic category was also inserted into these articles by editors other than Jobas: Darío Acosta Zurita, Islam in Albania (1945-1991), Mercè Prat i Prat, Pierre-Adrien Toulorge, Reign of Terror.

This misnamed category misleadingly implies that atheism (absence of belief in deities) is the source of persecution, which is nonsensical. There are a number of categories given for "Persecution by XXX", where XXX = a particular religion, and certain tenets of that religion (re: blasphemy, apostasy, adultery, homosexuality, etc.) might be a source of persecution. But atheism isn't a religion (a common misconception), nor does it mandate any persecuting action like some religions might (stoning, lashes, exile, death, etc.). There is a reason why we don't have a Persecution by atheists article to back up this category. Looking at the articles tagged with this category, it is apparent that persecution of religions by some communist governments is being mis-labeled as "Persecution by atheists", as if atheism was the source of the persecution. The communist dictatorships were the source of the persecution, and they were striving for an atheistic, non-religious government. The same confusion was applied to articles about anti-clericalist governments; the source of the persecution was the anti-religious government, not "atheists". Xenophrenic (talk) 22:39, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose User:Xenophrenic has been removing articles from this category for a long time, against consensus, as well as the thoughtful comments of other users (e.g. see User:LoveMonkey's post here, User:TheTimesAreAChanging's post here). At the same time, User:Xenophrenic has tried to sneak in the category Persecution by Christians in unrelated articles, for example, one about the "Population history of indigenous peoples of the Americas" (see this) although several other examples exist. User:Xenophrenic was blocked this past Autumn for edit warring against User:Ramos1990 and blanking sections about atheism for historical articles involving the persecution of Christians under the militant state atheism of the USS. The administrator User:BrownHairedGirl has asked User:Xenophrenic to restore the articles in the aforementioned category, Category:Persecution by atheists in order that a proper discussion can be held here. Thanks, Jobas (talk)

Hi, Jobas! Would you mind refraining from making personal attacks? Let's keep this discussion focused on the category under review, and if you'd like to express your concerns about perceived behavioral problems of editors, please do so at WP:ANI. Thanks, Xenophrenic (talk) 22:39, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Jobas, could you please give a policy-based reason for your oppose? Or alternatively, provide reliable sources which clearly convey "Persecution by atheists"? Also, I see no discussions where consensus to keep the problematic category was developed. Xenophrenic (talk) 18:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Having asked twice already, and with no response forthcoming, I'll take that as an indication that you have no support for the problematic category you created. Xenophrenic (talk) 08:30, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

• Strong Delete - The category isn't supported by reliable sources, isn't backed by a supporting article, and most of the articles previously tagged in error are better served by more informative categories Category:Religious persecution by communists, etc. Xenophrenic (talk) 22:39, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

According to Geoffrey Blainey: "Most atheists rejected, as did many modern Christians, the idea of a God who constantly intervened in daily affairs. Another effect of Christianity, they argued, was the promotion of war and violence. It tends to be forgotten, however, that the most ruthless leaders in the Second World War were atheists and secularists who were intensely hostile to both Judaism and Christianity. Later massive atrocities were committed in the East by those ardent atheists, Pol Pot and Mao Zedong. All religions, all ideologies, all civilizations display embarrassing blots on their pages". (source: A Short History of Christianity; Viking; 2011; p.543), according to the same source Many priests were killed and imprisoned. Thousands of churches were closed, some turned into hospitals. In 1925 the government founded the League of Militant Atheists to intensify the persecution.

Under the doctrine of state atheism in the Soviet Union, there was a "government-sponsored program of forced conversion to atheism" conducted by Communists. Christopher Marsh, a professor at the Baylor University writes that "Tracing the social nature of religion from Schleiermacher and Feurbach to Marx, Engles, and Lenin, I attempt to explain how the idea of religion as a social product evolved to the point of policies aimed at the forced conversion of believers to atheism. After all, Marx himself never advocated using force to stop people from believing in religion, but in the end this is precisely what regimes did in his name."

So there been reliable sources cited that source of the persecution in some countries was the anti-religious and atheist government.--Jobas (talk) 23:03, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you for the quotations, Jobas. You cut & pasted that from our Talk page discussion at Category_talk:Anti-religious_campaign_in_the_Soviet_Union, so I'll cut & paste the same response:

The definition of atheism may not be important to you, but it is important for our readers. When you created the category "Persecution by atheists", you are telling our readers that there is persecution because of atheism, which is not true and is not reliably sourced. Hopefully you can understand that. Please let me know if you do not. A category which says "Persecution by XXX" means the persecution is because the subject is XXX. A category which says "Persecution of XXX" means the persecution happened because the subject is XXX. If you intended the category to mean something else, you will need to reword it.

Your Blainey quotes say three things. (1) Blainey says some ruthless leaders (he doesn't name who) in the Second World War were also atheist or secularist, and that is very likely, since there are billions of secularists and atheists in the world. (2) Blainey also says that Pol Pot and Mao were atheist and they also committed atrocities, which I think is also true. (3) Blainey says all religions, all ideologies, all civilizations can be the source of bad things, which is very probably true — but atheism isn't a "religion" or an "ideology" or a "civilization". Blainey does not say anyone was "persecuted by atheists". In fact, what Blainey was actually saying is that not all war and violence is promoted by Christianity, and he gives examples of non-Christians (Mao, Pol Pot) to support his point. You would know this if you read the sentence just before the ones you quoted on page 543. Perhaps this quote about people like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, etc, would be helpful to your understanding: "Individual atheists may do evil things but they don't do evil things in the name of atheism." The blame for that lies with "dogmatic and doctrinaire Marxism", or totalitarianism, etc. (Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion; Pgs 315-316).

Your Marsh quote (if you read all of it) affirms what I have been saying, that it was the political regime, not "atheists", which did the persecution. From that same source, you'll see that Marsh explains it was the Bolsheviks who did the persecuting, not "atheists", although I'm sure many of the Bolsheviks were also atheists. I'm also sure many had mustaches, but that also was not the source of the persecution. Do you have any reliable sources which actually state that there was "Persecution by atheists"? We will need those sources if we are to maintain this category. Xenophrenic (talk) 18:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Religious believers in the Soviet Union were not persecuted by the abstract Platonic ideal of atheism in general, but they were persecuted by certain specific atheists in accordance with one particular specific manifestation of atheist ideology.

Are you referring to the ethologist, evolutionary biologist and atheist apologist Richard Dawkins who spends most of his time disparaging and critic of religions and religious people, and by the way he in not a historian (according to his Misplaced Pages article)? as far i remember Dawkins suggests that phrases such as "Catholic child" and "Muslim child" should be considered as socially absurd, and he is a prominent critic of religion that has stated his opposition to religion as two fold: religion is both a source of conflict and a justification for belief without evidence. So please bring sources of historians.--Jobas (talk) 20:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Apologist? No, I was referring to this Richard Dawkins. (And I don't understand what it is you wish to have sourced to a "historian"; clarify please?) Hope that helps, Xenophrenic (talk) 22:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Surely I was referring to this Richard Dawkins, but unfortunately he is not a "historian", therefore his personal opinion is not objective here.--Jobas (talk) 17:11, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

He is a respected academic (and a colleague of your McGrath, in fact), so he is a reliable source. Why do say he needs to be a historian? Xenophrenic (talk) 19:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

So far you have provided non except Dawkins who is not a reliable source on the issue.

The Pew Research Center which shows that after the fall of communism religious identification increased because of atheist repression of religion during the Soviet rule. This is another line of evidence from this reliable source.

"For centuries, Orthodox Christianity was the dominant religion in Russia. This began to change in the early 20th century, following the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution and the imposition of state-sponsored atheism as part of communist ideology. During the Soviet period, many priests were imprisoned, many churches were converted to other uses or fell into disrepair, and people who publicly professed religious beliefs were denied prestigious jobs and admission to universities. While it is likely that some share of the population continued, in private, to identify with the Orthodox Church and other religious groups, it is impossible to measure the extent to which these attachments survived underground during the Soviet period and to what extent they faded away. Similarly, it is difficult to disentangle the extent to which the upsurge in Orthodox affiliation found in the surveys represents an expression of long-held faith or a genuinely new wave of religious affiliation. It may be that after the fall of the U.S.S.R. in 1991, Russians felt freer to express the religious identities they had quietly maintained during the Soviet era.3 However, given that the share of Russians identifying with a religion rose almost as much between 1998 and 2008 as it did from 1991 to 1998, the data suggest that the change is not solely an immediate aftereffect of the collapse of the Soviet system." .--Jobas (talk) 20:06, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

...religious identification increased because of atheist repression of religion during the Soviet rule - Jobas

Huh? Your Pew source does not say that. Pew wouldn't be so careless as to use a nonsensical phrase like "atheist repression of religion". Atheism is not anti-religion. In fact, there are many very religious atheists. Please read it again more carefully. Your source attributes the "communist ideology", as do many source. Xenophrenic (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and yes I've cited many reliable sources already (keep reading; they are in English). And your declaration that "Dawkins who is not a reliable source" doesn't hold water here. You are welcome to raise your concern at the Reliable Source Noticeboard if you'd like. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

• Keep Is a legitimate member of the Category:Religious persecution tree. Perhaps rename to Category:Religious persecution by atheists. Laurel Lodged (talk) 23:15, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

• Agree, we should most certainly add "religious" to the category name. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:07, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment, User:Laurel Lodged. It actually is not, according to reliable sources, a legitimate member of "Religious persecution", which is the very reason why it was nominated for deletion. But if you have reliable sources which say otherwise, it would be great if you could produce them for us to review. Otherwise, your comment doesn't advance the discussion. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 18:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

@Xenophrenic: What are the attributes of the other members of Category:Religious persecution tree that make them worthy members of that tree which are not shared by the nominated category? Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:06, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

The other "Persecuted by XXX" subcategories of "Religious persecution" (there are 4 - Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims) have the attribute of being religions. As religions, they also have tenets (rules, dogma, commandments) upon which individuals or groups may act to commit persecutions (which may range from mere discrimination to capital punishment). Atheism, on the other hand, is not a religion or ideology or even a cohesive group, and has no such tenets. Atheism is the absence of belief in supernatural deities. One cannot persecute others "in the name of atheism"; it's nonsensical. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 23:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

@Xenophrenic: My question related to the Category:Religious persecution tree, not to a non existent Category:Persecution by religious groups tree. The former has persecution visited by people of one religion (or none) on a group not affiliated to that religion (or non religion). So whether it's "by" or "of", the common thread is persecution. The point of this discussion is whether or not the bit in parentheses above (i.e. "none" and "or non religion") ought to be in scope for the grandparent tree. If the answer to the question is in the affirmative, then the nominated category ought to stay. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:01, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Just so we're clear, I never referred to a nonexistent category tree. And also, "atheist/atheism" is neither a religion or non-religion. With those clarified, let's continue: I believe you misunderstand the point of this discussion. We are not discussing whether ("none" and "or non religion") is a component of the parent tree. It is, and we have no disagreement on that. We are discussing the malformed, misnamed Category:Persecution by atheists, which by its very wording misleads our readers to think atheism is the source, cause or impetus behind the persecution - which reliable sources (and common sense) say is not the case. If the category was instead named "Persecution by anti-religious groups" (which "atheists" certainly is not - there are many quite religious atheists), there would be no problem here. So to answer you question, should "non-religion" be a component of the Religious persecution tree? Probably (see the Bolsheviks campaigns against religions, for instance), but that isn't what we're discussing here. Does that alleviate some of the confusion? Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose This category is certainly worth keeping because numerous reliable sources are clearly available on the topic of atheists persecuting people for numerous reasons including discrimination against people's worldviews and belief systems precisely because others were not atheists. USSR, Cambodia, China, and numerous other countries engaged in variant kinds of persecutions of religious people of all stripes. Following User:Jobas, excellent resources like "STORMING THE HEAVENS: THE SOVIET LEAGUE OF THE MILITANT GODLESS" by Daniel Peris (Cornell University Press) are easily accessible which detail various levels of persecution done by some atheists in the USSR, for example. The suggestion that one switch "persecution by atheists" to "persecution by communists" would obscure the issues because not all atheists have been communists. For example, Dechristianization of France during the French Revolution is a case before communism even existed. Also, the charge of atheism being a component of persecution makes sense give that communism is perfectly compatible with Islam, Christianity, and other belief systems. In other words, Muslim communists, Christian communists, etc of course do exist. The original intent of the category seems to have been that atheists be highlighted because people in the USSR, China, Cabodia, etc could have had communist societies with religious diversity. And yet the focal point for many of these persecutions went beyond political view points into personal, religious or ultimate worldviews. It went beyond politics and economics. Huitzilopochtli (talk) 02:42, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

...numerous reliable sources are clearly available on the topic of atheists persecuting people for numerous reasons...

It would be great if you could please produce them here for us to review. As it stands now, all we have are sources of religious persecution by communist governments and dictators as they tried to eradicate religion and implement an atheistic regime. Please be careful not to confuse the very real religious persecution by political forces in their attempt to eradicate religious influence, with "persecution by atheists", which is not what occurred. I happen to own Storming the Heavens. From the very first page: When the Bolsheviks came to power in 1917, they promised to sweep away all that was old in Russian society and to create an entirely new civilization. One of the most dramatic points on this agenda foresaw the metamorphosis of Holy Russia into an atheistic Soviet Russia. While the Bolsheviks ultimately attacked all religions and denominations with devastating effect, their main thrust was directed at the Russian Orthodox Church, which was still a vital force in Russian culture. As you can see, the Bolsheviks, a revolutionary political government faction, persecuted the religious and is the source of that persecution. But your confusion is understandable, as their eradication of religion would result in an atheistic society, but "atheists" is not the source of the persecution. I'm looking forward to the numerous sources you mentioned. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 18:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Actually, even what you quoted from "STORMING THE HEAVENS" proves my point that the Bolsheviks went beyond politics into persecuting religious organizations which makes no sense since Communism and the Orthodox Church were not intrinsically opposed. Religion and communism are certainly compatible so the issue is not based on politics. It goes beyond that into worldviews and personal convictions (beyond communism or capitalism or any other political or economic configuration). Furthermore, in the intro of "STORMING THE HEAVENS" it does note that atheism was an active part of a social program so one cannot say that atheism was not involved Soviet activity "Created in 1925, the League of the Militant Godless was the nominally independent organization established by the Communist Party to promote atheism. By all outward appearances, the League seemed to succeed in its mission. In 1932, seven years after its creation, the League claimed 5.5 million members, 2 million more than the Communist Party itself. The League's Central Council in Moscow published its own newspaper, Bezbozhnik (The Godless), several other Russian-language journals, and propaganda materials in many other languages of the Soviet Union. Antireligious pamphlets and posters were printed in large numbers. The League's far-flung network of cells and councils sponsored lectures, organized demonstrations, and actively propagandized against religious observance. Leading Bolshevik figures gave speeches at the League's national congress in 1929, at which the League officially became "Militant." The Communist Party, the Komsomol, the trade unions, the Red Army, and Soviet schools all conducted antireligious propaganda, but the League was the organizational centerpiece of this effort to bring atheism to the masses.". Others here seem to have provided other examples of reliable sources on the matter already too.

I will admit that the concept of persecution by Christians, Muslims, and etc are difficult to show since even the concept of religious violence seems to never be a primary reason, but a side justification for normal secular ends or needs. There are of course works which document the recent invention of the concept of "religion" which note that conceptions of religion are not historical and certainly not found in any holy texts - see "The Myth of Religious Violence: Secular Ideology and the Roots of Modern Conflict" by William T Cavanaugh (Oxford University Press). Interesting stuff. Huitzilopochtli (talk) 05:58, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

... "STORMING THE HEAVENS" proves my point that the Bolsheviks went beyond politics into persecuting religious organizations --Ramos1990

Thank you, we are on the same page regarding the source of the persecution. Now we need to create an appropriate category to convey it. As for your other comments and personal opinions, they might make for interesting discussion someday.

Others here seem to have provided other examples of reliable sources on the matter already too. --Ramos1990

Perhaps the others would be so kind as to make them available for our review. The scant few sources provided so far, like the Peris source we've been discussing, only confirm that our present category is inaccurate and misleading. Xenophrenic (talk) 08:30, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Hmmm...if you already agree that the issue is in things beyond communism (i.e. atheism and religion) then what is the issue? The sources of persecution are not in communism (as you originally proposed), but in atheism and anti-religious belief systems (in other words personal convictions on the nature of reality). Atheism is what the category tried to highlight - things going beyond communism or politics or economics so the category makes sense as is or with minor adjustments. Keeping in mind that Christian Communists and Muslim communists were around, it make no sense to limit anything by communism. Especially since the French (who were not communists) did engage in persecutions too. The scope is broader.Huitzilopochtli (talk) 09:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

What is the issue, you ask? The issue is the Category:Persecution by atheists has been nominated for deletion for being a nonsensical, inaccurate and source-less category. You initially offered the Peris source as possibly supporting the absurd notion that the absence of belief in gods is the source of persecution, but it turns out Peris said the communist Bolsheviks were the source of the persecution of religious organizations. (You, me, and the source agree.) If you think your sources "make no sense", that is an issue between you and the sources. So now I'm waiting for the next of your "numerous sources" offerings. As of now, there have been no sources presented which support the "Persecuted by atheists" construction. Xenophrenic (talk) 22:50, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

• (nom) While Xenophrenic seems to be right that advocating atheism was hardly ever the primary reason for persecution, that is not sufficient reason to delete the category. Because the persecution happened anyway. Perhaps rename the category to Category:Religious persecution by secular governments. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:56, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes. That ALT would probably be better again. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:56, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Laurel Lodged, A secular state (such as India) is very different from an atheist state (such as North Korea). Let's refocus to the discussion at hand which is whether to keep the category or not (thus far, most votes are in favour of opposing the deletion and keeping the category). Right now, the related categories read: Persecution by Muslims, Persecution by Buddhists, Persecution by atheists, etc. We need to follow standard conventions or else all of these categories would need to be renamed. Thanks.-- Jobas (talk) 20:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

One flaw in your assertion: atheists aren't in the "Muslims, Buddhists, etc." related category. Atheism isn't a religion like those others, so you are talking about two separate "conventions" here. Only the nonsensical "Persecution by atheists" would need to be renamed. Xenophrenic (talk) 22:50, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Laurel Lodged and Marcocapelle that Category:Religious persecution by secular governments would be an improvement. To be clear moving forward, however, Xenophrenic never said advocating atheism was hardly ever the primary reason for persecution. According to reliable sources, atheism was never the reason for persecution at all. Xenophrenic (talk) 22:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Which sources? till now you didn't provide any source!.--Jobas (talk) 12:37, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

English, please? Are you saying I haven't provided any sources until now? (And if so, what's the problem?) Xenophrenic (talk) 22:50, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

• Keep / Oppose In the textbook Christian History, Professor Alister E. McGrath of the University of Oxford in England writes that "From 1925 onwards, the League of Militant Atheists had urged the burning and dynamiting of huge numbers of Soviet churches, including some of great cultural importance." History is filled with several instances of persecution by atheists; Christians, in addition to Muslims, Buddhists and others have died or been placed in gulag camps as a result of intolerance by some atheist groups, in addition to atheist governments, and militant atheist leaders, such as Enver Hoxha, the dictator of the Socialist Republic of Albania. A Dictionary of Albanian Religion, Mythology, and Folk Culture states that:

Article 37 of the Albanian constitution of 1976 stipulated, "The State recognizes no religion and supports and carries out atheist propaganda in order to implant a scientific materialist world outlook in people."

Accordingly, Edwin E. Jacques in "The Albanians: An Ethnic History from Prehistoric Times to the Present" writes that “Northern mountaineers too insisted that the authorities should distinguish between the removal of politically unreliable priests and the fundamental human right to believe in God. Nevertheless, every mosque, church, monastery, convent, religious school, hospital or orphanage throughout the country was burned down, torn down or converted to serve what the state called ‘some more useful purpose.’” One editor's attempt to remove all the articles from this category and then nominate it for deletion is very inappropriate. Their edits will need rollbacked in due time. AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 16:07, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Are you referring to the priest and Christian apologist Alister McGrath who spends most of his time disparaging atheists and atheism (according to his Misplaced Pages article)? Yeah, I'd be a little cautious about leaning too heavily on him in this matter. You quote him about the League of Militant Atheists, but you should realize that was an "organization established by the Communist Party to promote atheism" (page 2 of the source recommended above by Ramos1990), and was a tool of the communists who were doing the actual persecution.

History is filled with several instances of persecution by atheists...

Then it should be no trouble for you to produce the reliable sources to support that contention. Please remember that we are looking for sources which state there was "Persecution by atheists", and not persecution by governments trying to eradicate religion and establish an atheistic regime, and not persecution by dictators or totalitarians who also happen to be atheist. Looking forward to your help, Xenophrenic (talk) 18:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Well being a priest do not minimize him, wasn't Georges Lemaître who proposed the theory of the expansion of the universe a priest also?. Alister McGrath is an intellectual historian, who's currently holds the Andreas Idreos Professorship in Science and Religion in the Faculty of Theology and Religion at the University of Oxford. who's was previously Professor of Theology, Ministry, and Education at King's College London and Head of the Centre for Theology, Religion and Culture. who's has also taught at Cambridge University and is a Teaching Fellow at Regent College. McGrath who's holds three doctorates from the University of Oxford, a DPhil in Molecular Biophysics, a Doctor of Divinity in Theology and a Doctor of Letters in Intellectual History.--Jobas (talk) 20:37, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Gee, that's all really nice. But none of that addresses the reliably sourced fact that the League was the name given to the organization created by the Communist Party to promote atheism and eradicate religion, so the communists are the persecutors - making "Persecuted by atheists" inapplicable. Xenophrenic (talk) 22:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

• Comment In my view this issue is a symptom from a deeper issue. While verifiability is at the core of ALL Misplaced Pages content, it appears that there is a strong reluctance to uphold this core policy for category membership and templates. I have never been convinced by any of the arguments that such category or template inclusions are harmless, and merely for convenience (as they are in my potentially misleading and even if true often original research (synthesis)). But for some reason the majority of editors simply does not appear to care about misleading implication in categories and templates. In other words, I am not sure this is the place to reach consensus on this, as similar problems are much broader across the whole project. In fact references I added to templates have been removed as overdoing it, and citation needed tags in templates have been aggressively removed because they would list all articles where the template was included as a page being insufficiently referenced (which is by definition the case by adding an unsourced template) rather than only the template itself. There does not even seem to be a way to add references to category membership (which in my view makes all challenged categories removable per core policies) Arnoutf (talk) 19:51, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
• Strong Delete - The 'Soviet communism = atheism' is a Christian-apologist 'talking points' meme that appeared around a decade ago, and is still somewhat popular one today (although it is growing quite tired, and has practically disappeared as a 'debate-gotcha'). It is of the opinion of some (and any citations will be to these) that it was not, in fact, a totalitarian leadership (like many organised religions) that opposed religion, but an "atheist" one. This category is only trying to 'reinforce' that selective view of reality in an effort present it as, not the selective-reality opinion it is, but fact. There are dozens of articles that try to do this as well, such as the State Atheism one... the facts within the article may be individually real, but together under that title, they are, at best, an opinion presented as fact, and, at worst, a lie. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 21:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC) — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that editors have been canvassed to this discussion.

No, I was not canvassed at all: I came across a notification that this discussion was open on the Talk:Atheism page.

The fact that someone would resort to this sort of based-on-no-evidence wikilawyering-accusation rather than present a rebuttal only underlines the above. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 06:00, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Xenophrenic made a request on the atheism article in order to WP:CANVASS users that he thought might be sympathetic to his POV here, we provide sources as According to Geoffrey Blainey: "It tends to be forgotten, however, that the most ruthless leaders in the Second World War were atheists and secularists who were intensely hostile to both Judaism and Christianity. Later massive atrocities were committed in the East by those ardent atheists, Pol Pot and Mao Zedong." (source: A Short History of Christianity; Viking; 2011; p.543), and user:Huitzilopochtli provide a source shows that atheism was going beyond communism into persecution by worldviews by other worldviews (i.e. atheism). meanwhile he doesn't.--Jobas (talk) 12:42, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

English please? We've already addressed the fact that Blainey doesn't convey that there was persecution because of atheism, and your statement "atheism was going beyond communism into persecution by worldviews by other worldviews" has no meaning in the English language. Reword, please? Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 16:21, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

• Delete per much of ThePromenader's and Xenophrenic arguments. Putting articles together in a disputed category implies a true relation between the article name and the topic of the article. Without a reliable sources making that connection explicit that is original research / synthesis. Arnoutf (talk) 10:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

original research ? well Geoffrey Blainey is one of the reliable sources that been provied.--Jobas (talk) 12:42, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Your Blainey source doesn't mention "Persecution by atheists", which is what we are discussing here. You say that English is not your native language, so perhaps you have misunderstood what you have read? It doesn't support the nonsensical category you created. Blainey only says: (1) some ruthless leaders (he doesn't name who) in the Second World War were also atheist or secularist, and that is very likely, since there are billions of secularists and atheists in the world. (2) that Pol Pot and Mao were atheist and they also committed atrocities, which I think is also true. (3) all religions, all ideologies, all civilizations can be the source of bad things, which is very probably true — but atheism isn't a "religion" or an "ideology" or a "civilization". Blainey does not say anyone was "persecuted by atheists". In fact, what Blainey was actually saying is that not all war and violence is promoted by Christianity, and he gives examples of non-Christians (Mao, Pol Pot) to support his point. You would know this if you read the sentence just before the ones you quoted on page 543. Perhaps this quote about people like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, etc, would be helpful to your understanding: "Individual atheists may do evil things but they don't do evil things in the name of atheism." The blame for that lies with "dogmatic and doctrinaire Marxism", or totalitarianism, etc. (Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion; Pgs 315-316). Do you have any reliable sources which actually state that there was "Persecution by atheists"? We will need those sources if we are to maintain this category. Xenophrenic (talk) 22:50, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Alternative categories or rename proposals

• @Jobas, Ramos1990, Renzoy16, Arnoutf, and ThePromenader: Please also comment on the alternative proposal (halfway this discussion) to keep this category but to rename it to Category:Religious persecution by secular governments. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:07, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

@Marcocapelle:, A secular state (such as India) is very different from an atheist state (such as North Korea). Let's refocus to the discussion at hand which is whether to keep the category or not (thus far, most votes are in favour of opposing the deletion and keeping the category). Right now, the related categories read: Persecution by Muslims, Persecution by Buddhists, Persecution by atheists, etc. We need to follow standard conventions or else all of these categories would need to be renamed. Thanks.--Jobas (talk) 12:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

• With the alternative we will keep the category. But a secular state is a broader and more neutral concept than an atheist state. Editors in favor of deletion seem to be troubled mostly by the (narrower) atheist/ideological focus, I suppose we can reach a better consensus by keeping the category and broadening the scope and make it less POV. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:39, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Again, same difference, and appeals to antiquity and popularity (number) do nothing to change the fact of the matter. "But it's a different word!" is not an argument, either, because the goal (presenting selective opinion as whole-story fact) is exactly the same, and it will tell the same story, albeit without the firebrand 'atheist' tag (and it is for that that those 'pushing' the 'communism = atheism' agenda translated the 'godless' in communist propaganda to 'atheist'), to the reader.

To show that any such 'atheist only' 'persecution' category merits existence, one would have to demonstrate, with citable, objective sources, that organisations not totalitarian, dictatorships, etc., persecuted in the name of atheism (or secularism) and nothing else. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 12:59, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

• The category, especially after renaming as alternatively proposed, is not in the name of an ideology, but by an institution for any reason. By secular states is just factual. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:39, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

• If you can't demonstrate that historical consensus calls those states (and describes their acts) by that name, then it's not fact at all, it's, at best, a minority-view (opinion), and, at worst, an unsupported apologist affirmation presented as fact. Either way, it has to be presented as such, but categories and article titles are a sneaky way around that. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 17:23, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I have to agree with User:Jobas here since there is a difference between secular state vs an atheist state. Most secular states are not atheistic states at all (they are mixed like the US government or the Indian government) The point of that category is to note that atheism has been involved in persecution (e.g. the League of the Militant Godless and others). The component of persecution here is personal worldviews of reality, not politics or economics. Persecution of people due to people's personal convictions of the universe and reality are beyond the scope of any government. In a technical sense, none of the persecutions in USSR or China or Cambodia should have occurred since personal worldviews of relaity are not the business of any government. The fact that people and institutions were targeted over personal views of reality is surely disturbing since any politics could have worked irrespective of personal worldviews. The fact that they did occur is sure evidence that belief in atheism did influence persecutions to some degree. Why would atheists make organizations of promoting atheism and persecuting all other worldviews if atheism was not involved? Clearly it was. Another good text on a history of atheists persecuting in the USSR is the "The Plot to Kill God: Findings from the Soviet Experiment in Secularization" By Paul Froese (University of California Press). I think that what User:Laurel Lodged proposed of Category:Religious persecution by atheists is a decent compromise or perhaps Category:Religious persecution by secularism. I think that Xenophrenic mentioned that the association of atheism with persecution might be the issue, but this is not a good reason for removal since Christianity, Islam, and others are also not inherently associated with mandates for persecuting either. Furthermore, it is certain that when any persecutions occurred, it was usually done by personnel who favored it and personnel who did not. Like any military group or campaign, the work was done but that does not mean that most participants were in favor of the actions their duty required of them.Huitzilopochtli (talk) 20:30, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, the association of persecution with atheism has "the issue" of no causative correlation. There are no "rules" to atheism upon which an atheist might justify a persecution action, unlike with Christianity, Islam, and others. Xenophrenic (talk) 22:50, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Opinion on 'selective worldviews' aside (non-sequiturs that will figure nowhere in any article or category), that does nothing to change the fact that it was totalitarian/despotic/dictatorship regimes doing the persecution (the 'godless atheists' was but one Soviet-sponsored youth group, not the entire Soviet communist totalitarian-communist regime ); presenting that as just 'atheism' is both disingenuous and a partial truth (or, in other words, a falsehood), and no amount of 'selective reality' (sophism!) rhetoric unshared by any historian consensus, but only a narrow selection of apologist opinion, can change that. Presenting apologist-opinion 'talking points' without presenting them as such, especially as historical fact, is quite against everything Misplaced Pages is all about. "Category:Religious persecution by atheists' is attempting to use/abuse Misplaced Pages to WP:SOAPBOX a lie, period. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 21:46, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I applaud Marcocapelle's attempt to go beyond simply acknowledging a problem, and attempting to actually come up with solutions. The problem was the creation of a "Persecution by atheists" nonsense category by User:Jobas. It was created under the same misconception that the problematic (and now deleted) articles Historical persecution by atheism and Historical persecution by atheists were attempted - in the words of their creator: I just seems to me that if there are articles about persecutions done under religion that if it can be shown that persecutions where done under non-religion that would be balance. (--LoveMonkey) The illogic is astounding; atheism isn't "non-religion" nor a "religion", and while persecution has indeed been done in the name of various religions, persecution has never been done in the name of absence of belief in gods. Jobas statement above, Right now, the related categories read: Persecution by Muslims, Persecution by Buddhists, Persecution by atheists, etc., demonstrates the same illogic. No, Jobas, they are not "related categories" because "Muslim" and "Buddhist" imply adherence to religious tenets, while "atheist" proscribes no such religious tenets.

Marcocapelle has suggested renaming the nonsense category to Category:Religious persecution by secular governments, which has some merit for two reasons: (1) it would still allow the grouping of some very real instances of religious persecution, and (2) it correctly indicates the source of the persecution as the government or regime. The problem, however, is with the word "secular" which has potentially multiple conflicting meanings. Our article on secularism says, "One manifestation of secularism is asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings" which arguably could encompass Soviet hostility toward religion, but our article also says, "a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people", which does not describe the Soviet position at all, and is actually a common meaning of the word. Other editors (above) have also voiced concerns about the "secular" part. I've looked at all of the previously tagged articles listed above and I think all those with actual sourced incidents of religious persecution would be covered properly by just these: Category:Religious persecution by communists (or 'under communism'), Religious persecution under anti-clericalism. Xenophrenic (talk) 22:50, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps a better compromise would be to name it Category:Religious persecution by secularism. Secularism is more of a broad term that of course includes atheist activities as opposed to "secular" which is a universal and even a Christian term from the medieval period. The argument that User:ThePromenader brings up about regimes doing the dirty business therefore their worldviews are innocent makes no sense since if the worldviews played no role then organizations like the Militant Godless should not have existed (why would atheists call themselves "atheists", then write about it and make proclamations with it?) and no religious persecutions would have occurred because communism is not inherently anti-religious (an easy example is religious communism). On top of that ALL members of any regime carry worldviews themselves, but only a few usually bring them out and manifest it in public policy and life like the Soviets did with the League of the Militant Godless. All regimes, politics, totalitarian governments are all compatible with all religions. The extra step of isolating people's worldviews when they do not impact their worldly activities is the focus of this discussion.Huitzilopochtli (talk) 01:56, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

There is no compromise with mistruth. Again (and again): unless it can be demonstrated that an organisation that does not have another goal (despotism, totalitarianism, communism, etc.) conducted the persecution 'in the name of secularism' (and no other), and that historical consensus shares that view, then the 'persecution by secularism' label (which a categorisation is) is a lie. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 04:55, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Hmmm...what you said "unless it can be demonstrated that an organisation that does not have another goal (despotism, totalitarianism, communism, etc.) conducted the persecution 'in the name of secularism' (and no other)" does not make much sense since nearly no persecution was ever done exclusively in the name of a worldview. All persecutions involve complex goals (and much of it affects the public and thus politics) of which atheism and religion take part of in some instances. Here is yet another addressing more to the point- "Godless Communists: Atheism and Society in Soviet Russia, 1917-1932" by William B. Husband (Northern Illinois University Press) states in the Intro: "For centuries, Russian intellectuals as well as the rank and file have vigorously debated what it means to be Russian and, with even greater passion, what the mission of Russia ought to be. The resultant array of competing prescriptions has undoubtedly enriched the country's intellectual life and reverberated strongly beyond its borders, but it has also failed to produce anything resembling consensus. The worst cases have led to persecution and bloodshed. This book examines one highly significant chapter in the ongoing contention over collective behavior in Russia: the promotion of Soviet atheism during 1917-1932. The study of belief systems - religious, ideological, philosophical, scientific, occult - provides important insight into every society, of course, and Russia is by no means unique in having experienced calamity and carnage when one group tried to alter the basic views and actions of another. Long before Marxism, efforts to eliminate heresy and apostasy, variously defined, and to control the social environment punctuated Russian history no less than the rest of the violent and intolerant premodern world. By the nineteenth century, ideas from Europe helped ferment intellectual, political, and spiritual discord in Russia, and the socioeconomic displacement and secularizing influences that everywhere accompany industrial modernization challenged tsarist institutions no less fundamentally than other monarchies and landholding aristocracies. But the cultivation of atheism in Soviet Russia also possessed distinct characteristics, none more important than the most obvious: atheism was an integral part of the world's first large scale experiment in communism. The promotion of an antireligious society therefore constitutes and important development in Soviet Russian and the social history of atheism globally...In sum, this study of early Soviet atheism will demonstrate that - in addition to well documented clashes of political parties, classes, nationalities, and interest groups - the intensity of competing cultural perceptions and aspirations in Russian society played an instrumental role in shaping the aftermath of the revolution...Therefore, whatever one's personal view of the phenomenon Russians literally call godlessness , atheism was a historical reality of the Soviet period - a belief system that millions accepted as literal truth and with which millions more reached an accommodation."

Perhaps you or Xenophrenic can point out where in communism, it is mandatory to destroy the Russian Orthodox Church, priests, alter peoples belief systems, etc? Huitzilopochtli (talk) 05:16, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Repetition does not make truth, and address the point, not the person. And 'persecution by atheists/secularism' is the claim, so it is for it to demonstrate that it represents historical consensus.

If it was communists doing the persecution, then a factual label would be 'Soviet communist anti-religious persecution'. The goal here is to attribute 'crimes' to secularism and atheism (that are not even 'things' in themselves, let alone an organisation, so this is disingenuous, too), and that is exactly what readers will take away from it... thus the goal.

Apologism may very well attain its WP:SOAPBOX goal through other means ('tire-em-down', canvassing, 'majority rules', etc.), but none of that makes fact. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 05:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

You have not provided sources that show that communism was that cause of persecutions of religious people. I am actually hoping you would provide some foundation to switch from atheism to communism if you were to shift some of the blame in that direction. I already provided 3 sources by Soviet historians showing that atheism was an active component of degradation of non-atheists including influencing demise. Merely being totalitarian or communist does not mean that religion has to be persecuted, no? The only counter I see is a citation on Richard Dawkins and he is not a reliable source on the topic since he has no academic background in that matter. You should provide some sources on your view. Atheism is not just an abstraction but an empirical manifestation that is quantifiable by the fact that people self-identify as atheists, people write about atheism and society, promote atheistic identity and activism towards society, produce groups and organization to talk about atheists and what they should do in their lives and society at large, etc. Lenin-Maxism which is a fusion of atheism and communism did lead to injustices every once in a while, considering that Karl Marx alone (communism) had some mixed positive views on religion, the negative stuff came from somewhere else. The amount of devastation done to religious believers seems inexplicable except throught putting some of the blame on radicalized atheism - which why aggressive attempts were done to make atheists, not communists.Huitzilopochtli (talk) 06:34, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Again again again, 'atheist persecution' (as 'atheism' and nothing else) is the claim, so it is for it to demonstrate historical consensus (and no amount of talk-page sophistry is a replacement for this). It does not have it, thus the attempt to shift the burden of proof. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 06:54, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Again - Already addressed that numerous times. Atheists persecuting religious people at social, cultural, institutional and even personal levels. Who else is persecuting religion? Communist Christians? Communist Muslims? Lack of citations for pure communism being the culprit does not really help.Huitzilopochtli (talk) 07:36, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

No, you ignored it several times. 'Communist persecution of religion' would be accurate and reflects historical consensus. 'Atheist persecution of religion' is not and does not, and we both know that. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 08:00, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Nope already addressed with quotes from historians. Communism itself is not the source of antireliigon - it was atheism. There would be no need for the emergence of the League of Millitant Atheists if communism is all that was needed to do the persecutions. If communism is anti-religion by default then provide a source by a historian showing that it was the cause of antireligion. It should not be hard if it is so common of a view. Finding sources on atheism as being involved in the persecutions are not hard to find either, which is why I have provided some already. Here is another one "Anti-religious Propaganda in the Soviet Union: Study of Mass Persuasion" by David E Powell (MIT Press). Huitzilopochtli (talk) 08:46, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Historical consensus, but I have repeated myself so often that you must be purposely disingenuous at this point. You can attempt to rationalise your unshared-by-historic-consensus apologist propaganda all you like, but attempting to use wikipedia (and game it) to spread it as a 'fact'-label when it is not is flagrant abuse of it. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 09:38, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Since most of the articles this category has been applied to concern Communist Russia's persecution of religion, there is no reason that a 'Communist Russian anti-religion' (or the like) category would not suffice for articles that apply; historical consensus supports it.

The ignoring historic consensus (to favour only a few selective publications (and even these do not support this category's claim, as demonstrated earlier)), with the insistance on using the word 'atheist' (or 'secularist') alone only demonstrates that the goal here is to use Wikepedia to spread a narrow Christian-apologist anti-atheist agenda-opinion and make it seem fact. This is clear for all. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 09:53, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

How is this ignoring historical consensus when historical consensus acknowledges atheism as a core component of Soviet society? It's called Marxist–Leninist for a very good reason (a fusion of communism-Marx and atheism-Lenin) and there is a reason why historians regularly refer to it as that combination. Lenin can be blamed for inserting atheism when none of it was needed. You speak of historical consensus when you have not provided an example of historians actually removing atheism form their society. Again who did the persecutions? Christians? Jews? Even today, pretty much all the anti-religion rhetoric is fueled by atheists and their groups. There are not many candidates for sources of active anti-religion. The category merely notes that atheists have contributed to persecuted other for various reasons in the same way that Muslims or others have - of course no persecution is ever based soley on worldview, much of t is triggered by secular - mundane motives. But the denial of such basic historical facts is a bit worrying.Huitzilopochtli (talk) 10:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

If what you claimed was true, you could cite any mainstream source, yet you can't, and even the ones you cite do not support your claim. Your agenda is clear. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 10:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

The extra step of isolating people's worldviews when they do not impact their worldly activities is the focus of this discussion. --Huitzilopochtli (Ramos1990)

Huh? No. The focus of this discussion is the nonsensical and policy-violating Category:Persecution by atheists. More specifically in this sub-section of the discussion, we're discussing the possible creation of alternative categories which adhere to Misplaced Pages policy and reliable sources, and still allow us to categorize some notable instances of religious persecution. All the superfluous talk about "worldviews" and what-not appear to be distractions not related to the matter at hand. And please remember: "atheism" is not a "worldview". ("Atheism itself is not a worldview, it is not a philosophy of life." --Krueger 1998)

Perhaps you or Xenophrenic can point out where in communism, it is mandatory to destroy the Russian Orthodox Church, priests, alter peoples belief systems, etc? --Huitzilopochtli (Ramos1990)

If you are objecting to having "communism" or "communists" in the name of proposed new categories describing those at fault for religious persecution, I somewhat share your concern. The aggression against religions (churches, priests, etc.) is not an actual principle of communism, just as it is not a principle of atheism, or even Marxism (see Marxism and religion). The antagonism toward religion (using the Soviet history as an example) can be traced to Leninism and particularly the establishment of the Soviet Union. In your opinion, do you think it would be more feasible to create multiple subcategories under "Religious persecution" based upon specific government regimes (i.e.; Soviet Union) instead of ideologies (i.e.; communism)? Xenophrenic (talk) 19:35, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

• Split -- Some of the items in the list relate to persecution by communists, as a result their atheist ideology, but the martyrs of the Spanish Civil War were probably the victims of anti-clericalism, rather than specifically of atheism. There may be some other sub-classes. One answer may be to encourage the content to be moved to a series of sub-cats, leaving this as a container. We can then decide whether it is useful as a container. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:33, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

...as a result their atheist ideology...

Let's try to keep our terminology accurate, please, just to avoid confusion. As we know, "atheist ideology" isn't a thing, and atheism isn't an ideology. (Atheism is not itself an ideology; there is no such thing as an "atheist mindset" or an "atheist movement." Atheism per se hasn't inspired and doesn't lead to anything in particular because it is an effect--not a cause--and there are countless reasons for a person to not believe... --Perkins 2008) It simply means absence of belief in deities. Can we assume you meant "anti-religious ideology"?

One answer may be to encourage the content to be moved to a series of sub-cats...

I agree with that much, User:Peterkingiron, and have proposed as much above, with Category:Religious persecution as the container. Xenophrenic (talk) 19:35, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

• General comments

1. There is a lot in the above discussion referring specifically to communists. Note that communists have a category of their own: Category:Religious persecution by communists, which is a category that is not nominated here. The more typical examples for the nominated category are Mexico in the 1920s and republican Spain in the 1930s.
2. There is a lot in the above discussion referring to goals of persecutors. Note that the original alternative proposal Category:Religious persecution by secular governments is goal-free, it only tells us who the persecuting party is, namely governments of countries that have separated church and state. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Category:GKIDS animated films

• Propose deleting Category:GKIDS animated films - Template:Lc1
  

Nominator's rationale: I'd actually helped to categorize this a while back without realizing that this was a distributor, not producer. As stated at Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_15#Category:Drafthouse_Films_films and other Cfds, films have multiple distributors per market and medium, and accordingly this has never been considered to be a WP:DEFINING characteristic. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:05, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Lugnuts 08:04, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Category:Ancient Roman forts in England

• Propose merging Category:Ancient Roman forts in England to Category:Roman fortifications in England

Nominator's rationale This one seems to have been left behind by a previous CFM. Just a tidy-up. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:15, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

• @Laurel Lodged: thanks for this nomination. It is now evident from Iazyges (talk · contribs)' reply at Category talk:Ancient Roman forts in England that this category was meant to be listed at Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_November_6#Ancient_roman_forts_in_the_United_Kingdom_sub-cats, where the others were renamed (and not at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 November 5 where others were deleted). – Fayenatic London 12:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
• Comment: Note that the two categories have different parents. Presumably the parents from the nominated category should be added to the target category page, if the merger is approved. – Fayenatic London 12:40, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose -- There is a category that needs to be removed (probably merged), but it is Category:Roman fortified camps in England‎. Most of the subject matter of the previous discussion related to Roman provinces where there were articles only on legionary forts, but in England we have a lot on auxiliary forts. I have reservations over the use of "England" which is an anachronism before perhaps AD 575 and would prefer merger to something such as Roman Britannia. However the target has three subcats: Walls will cover Hadrians Wall and Antonine Wall (but it is in Scotland); Forts covers auxiliary and legionary forts; and signal stations (self-explanatory and fairly rare); we might also have marching camps and practice camps, as additional siblings. The target Category:Roman fortifications in England is appropriate as a container category to hold these. I think the accepted term today is "fort", rather than "camp" for permanent installations.

Instead Merge Category:Roman fortified camps in England‎ to Category:Ancient Roman forts in England. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:49, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Category:Smart speaker

• Propose renaming Category:Smart speaker to Category:Smart speakers

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:CAT, should be plural. McGeddon (talk) 13:18, 19 January 2017 (UTC)