Talk:Christianity Is Stupid

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is this really worth having a page? (Kaiser jay 20:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Yes- having stubs helps people see areas where Wikipedia needs article improvements. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) (Review me!) 20:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The song was never a single, which is typically the threshold where a separate article should be used for a song. Furthermore, there is repetition of the content in the so called "Controversy" section (which probably should be renamed to something more appropriate). +mt 20:53, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. The WP:NSONG guideline says a song can have its own article if there has been significant multiple independent discussion of the song in third-party publications. Here are some examples of that:
These examples are in addition to Seattle's The Stranger and the Detroit Metro Times which are already used as references. Binksternet (talk) 23:31, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the detailed response. I've retracted the merge proposal as the song has notability to exist as a separate article (despite being well below the size normally used to split; WP:SIZESPLIT). I'll trim the unnecessary variations of Christianity Is Stupid#Controversy repeated in Escape from Noise and David Brom. +mt 01:24, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Newsgroup posting from Mark Hosler on learning more fallout from press release[edit]

  • Hosler, Mark (18 Mar 2001). "Shelter from Helter Stupid". — not sure if much can be used without verification. Also, BLP concerns. / edg 19:39, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Christianity Is Stupid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:50, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]