. No major support for deletion, final target can be hashed out elsewhere if necessary. Primefac (talk) 13:35, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
Unnecessary and uncivil and not mentioned on target. Would be uncivil if mentioned on target as simply propogating invcivility. G10 was declined. Suggest delete; though might be ssuitable as a stand-alone article Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:29, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep for two reasons:
- :1) The title is not directed at any specific person and the redirect is being used for an encyclopedic purpose. Which brings me to...
- :2) It is mentioned in the target: {{tq|There were multiple campaigns around the world guided by notable personalities, such as Busy Philipps and Ariana Grande to get people to stay home utilizing the hashtag #staythefuckhome, #staythefhome and #stayhome and flatten the curve across social media.}}, on Social_distancing#2019–2020_coronavirus_pandemic. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 14:35, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- strong keep there is absolutely nothing uncivil about the redirect, the word fuck itself is not uncivil within context. This is a legitimate international campaign run by the big three social networks, Instagram, Facebook and Twitter (#staythefuckhome, #stayhome, #staythefhome) along with countless notable people from big screen actors/actresses, to professors and doctors to flatten the curve with millions of posts about it and coverage in mainstream media as I indicated in the target article. It's not currently suitable for a standalone article but it's absolutely relevant to Social_distancing#2019–2020_coronavirus_pandemic and sourced, contrary to the nominators assertion. A little bit of WP:BEFORE is also your friend. Please remember that it is generally expected to notify creators when you nominate their creations, {{u|Djm-leighpark}}.Praxidicae (talk) 14:38, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
::Also for some clarity, I've added nearly a dozen sources to the target about this, including a piece from Rolling Stone, two pieces by actual Forbes and HuffPo staff among countless others. If one were to google this term, it would be an easy 30 second search to show that the term is relevant to social distancing and notable. Praxidicae (talk) 14:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
:::A good example about how to spread incivility. Feel happy. I am now off from home to visit a vulnerable person at home who has become non-responsive to phone calls. Trust me what I can think about BEFORE in this case! A stand alone article is appropriate if it is that notable.Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:58, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
::::Repeatedly accusing editors of incivility is a baseless accusation and in itself a personal attack. A stand alone article is not appropriate and this is precisely what redirects are for. Please explain how I have been uncivil or created an attack page based on policy or redact your statement. Lastly, you have several years experience here and are not a newbie, you should know what a WP:BEFORE search is or at the very least, how to use google. Praxidicae (talk) 15:01, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
:::::There is a big difference between the incivility of the redirect title and the you accusing you of incivility. You know well the necessary procedure ... ie take me to WP:ANI if you feel I have made a WP:WPA and I am dealing with you whilst dealing RL with a couple of vulnerable people who are sort of alrightish thankfully. thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:19, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
::::::WP:CIVIL doesn't apply to article titles. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 16:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
::::::Your personal matters are not the concern of Wikipedia, if you're so over whelmed by such things, perhaps a break is in order instead of a nonsensical disjointed nomination of a valid topic. As for the subject matter, can you explain where in policy or established consensus this redirect is inappropriate while simultaneously being appropriate for a standalone article?! Praxidicae (talk) 16:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
:::::::Well Stay at home seems to be earlier and has more hits .... but I think its right OTRS should bully me off so I'll take that advice and self impose a mini-break. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:49, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
:::::::: {{ping|Djm-leighpark}} If someone is bullying you through OTRS, you should report this to someone. That's far more of a problem than an incivil redirect. Natureium (talk) 16:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
:::::::::I will confirm I am not being bullied through OTRS. I will I was indicating had incoming indicators from multiple vulnerable people since the beginning of this process which means I was finding myself in an escalation. The issues were low level and not critical and more of a frustration to deal with under local Covid-19 restrictions (and my issues are trivial compared to that of others). I perhaps should have engaged with the CSD decliner before noiminating who in common with the redirect creator is a OTRS volunteer and is also I note an oversighter. Hmmm.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:10, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
:::::::: {{ping|Djm-leighpark}} If you're concerned about vulnerable people during this period, they really should be your first priority, not Wikipedia. Wikipedia will still be here when the COVID-19 situation has passed and then we can decide on what redirects we wish to keep and which may need to be deleted or have their target changed. I don't know if you're aware or not, but there are no limits on the number of redirects that can exist for an article, so having both Stay at home and Stay the fuck home is not a problem from either a technical nor a policy point of view. Take care. Nick (talk) 17:01, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
:::::::::: @{{u|Nick}}: Having to real with RL became an increasing issue during this process and just as I thought i'd cleared space other stuff came in. The {{noredirect|Stay-at-home}} dab you raise is an interesting point and I had spotted that also before I self-enforced-break however I could not use the same redirect as Stay the fuck home. The Stay at home slogan/campaigns may pre-date Stay the fuck home in a coronavirus context, certainly February and possibly January. However the same redirect cannot be used and WP currently promotes Stay the fuck home over Stay at home. This is beyond the scope of this redirect discussion. I will also comment is while Wikipedia will survive Covid-19 some of us may not.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:10, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep I'm not sure I understand your reasoning. If it's too offensive for wikipedia, it's too offensive for wikipedia. Rather you're saying that it's too incivil to be a redirect but could be an article instead? Natureium (talk) 16:51, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a notable phrase mentioned at the target article. Personal feelings about one word in it (good or bad) are irrelevant. Thryduulf (talk) 17:28, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep the term is mentioned and this is no way an attack page.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 20:31, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
::At the begining of this process {{oldid|Social distancing|947620213}} the word fuck was not on the target.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:10, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Retarget to Social distancing#Social media campaigns. OcelotCreeper (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Retarget - This is a social media term. It needs to go, as stated above, to the specific social media related subsection of 'Social_distancing#Social_media_campaigns'. I should add that there's nothing wrong at all with redirects being mean-spirited so long as they are otherwise justified. For example, 'Tricky Dick' justifiably exists and goes to President Nixon's page. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 06:42, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. This exact phrase is all over the Internet nowadays. And it cannot be a personal insult as it does not target any specific person. JIP | Talk 22:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - Let me say pragmatically it is going towards a keep; and in fact the action is perhaps more on links to Stay-at-home order and the DAB Stay-at-home is more fruitful; though these are not articles I particularly choose to edit. This may be closed if people like; or can be left open for the craic; I'm not too bovvered either way. I leave that choice to other .... or point me at the nom. withdraw procedure if its helpful to others to have this closed earlier. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 01:01, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
