This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 20 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them.
Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
1) The phrase is now widely used as a synonym for New atheism, the ongoing movement; this may perhaps have been less obviously true five years ago, and there is no sign in the old AfD that the option of simply renaming was actually considered.
2) The old AfD was uncomfortable about using the title "Militant atheism" for anything except the century-old Russian organisation, in what looks very much like partisanship. The New atheism article would in fact be well named "Militant atheism" were it not for the dispute about that title five years ago, but we don't have to go there now. At the very least, "Militant atheism" has two meanings, which is all we need to create a dab page. The current straight redirect denies a major - I'd say easily the most common - use of the term, which is simply wrong. It's time we admitted that more than one meaning exists, so in that sense, yes, something has certainly changed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:52, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
I have mixed feelings about this proposal. On the one hand, it is true that most readers would want to have this take them to the New atheism article. On the other hand, it is not really a synonym for New atheism, so much as a pejorative framing of it that is used by its detractors. There probably ought to be a new RfC before acting on this. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:23, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
I suspect that Dawkins and co are just as willing to wear it as a badge of honour as their opponents are to use it as a label, so it might be positive, negative, or (for many readers) neutral. However, it seems quite wrong that there's no indication that the topic is, as a matter of practical fact, covered by the New atheism article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:01, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
There is already a hatnote which includes New atheism at the top of the page this redirects to. Mojoworker (talk) 20:04, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
I have disabled the request as discussion is continuing. Which meaning do editors feel is the "primary topic" for this term? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:24, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
To inform the selection of "primary topic" if that's what's needed (I'd say it wasn't, a dab page can be neutral on that question):
If there is a primary topic then guidelines say that there should not be a dab page. Just redirect and use a hatnote on the primary topic article. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:46, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
That's to be determined. Right now it looks as if League of Militant Atheists has been wrongly determined to be the primary topic. If so, then either New atheism should get a hat and the redirect should point there, or we need a dab page. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:58, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
I therefore propose that the redirect should point to New atheism, an article which describes "militant" or "evangelical atheism". Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:25, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Strong oppose. I was slightly open to a dab, above. But for the reasons that I said above, this proposal is something that I would strongly oppose. We can speculate about the degree to which the New atheists, collectively, would or would not accept "militant" as a badge of honor, but the fact remains that the term is used pejoratively by opponents of atheists. They do that a lot, and thus the search results. This would be like redirecting "superstition" to "religion", and just as objectionable. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:33, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
OK, I see there are strong illogical feelings here. Let's forget it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:15, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Nothing personal, just what I think is the right editorial decision. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:07, 11 March 2017 (UTC)