Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kung-Flu

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete per WP:SNOW. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:54, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kung-Flu[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotion of racism, xenophobia and stereotype PenulisHantu (talk) 02:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I agree. This term has been around for what, like a week? Leave this junk for Urban Dictionary. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Seconded the deletion. this is Wikipedia, not Urban Dictionary. Pahiy (talk) 02:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Garbage, has april fools come early? completely useless and borderline racist. Thirded deletion Homeofthething (talk) 03:59, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G3 Speedy Delete and salt into oblivion I don't usually like doing this in a nom vote!, but to @L293D: (who approved the AfC) and @Utopes: (reviewed); this racist garbage should have never been approved to be created or reviewed as A-OK, or left unprotected. 67.70.32.186 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)'s contrib history itself could do with a nice fine-tooth combing (SARS mask stands out right away, for instance).Nate • (chatter) 05:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a relatively mainstream term among right-wing pundits. Indeed white house staffers are known to use this term to describe COVID-19. You can call it racist, but that is not an argument. Would you also call for the deletion of the article "nigger", by that logic? Since, this is a non-standard terminology, it seems natural that we should re-direct this to the actual article. It's not an endorsement of the term, but merely a recognition of its existence. CompactSpacez (talk) 06:57, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
delete there is nothing main stream about this term, it's a racist fringe term and has no place on Wikipedia. Praxidicae (talk) 11:50, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - guys, you're getting it wrong. This page does not "disparage or threaten its subject", so it isn't an attack page. Since when did we start deleting relevant search terms because they might be "racist" or "xenophobic" or whatever? Come on, we have an entire article on nigger, negro, chink, and we have extremely graphically detailed articles on sexual terms. To quote WP:NOTCENSORED: "Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive‍—‌even exceedingly so. Attempting to ensure that articles and images will be acceptable to all readers, or will adhere to general social or religious norms, is incompatible with the purposes of an encyclopedia." So far the Delete !votes have said that this page should be deleted because it is: racist, xenophobic, stereotypical, junk, useless, borderline racist, racist garbage, and a racist fringe term. If you're going to vote delete, explain why you think this term hasn't received enough coverage to stay here on WP. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinese virus, just four days ago, was closed as keep because, well, it is a widely used term that has received enough significant coverage. Personally, I'm not sure whether "Kung-Flu" has received enough significant, reliable, coverage to deserve a place in our encyclopedia, but one thing's for sure, this page shouldn't be deleted on grounds or racism before nigger, negro, and chink go as well. L293D (☎ • ✎) 12:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- CompactSpacez, User:L293D, I really, really wish that y'all would get as much of a kick out of dropping disgusting racist terms for white people as you do for non-white people. Why is it that the n-word needs to be used as an example, invariably, in such conversations? Don't y'all think that this is just some white privilege surfacing? Why does it often seem as if such conversations are really just a good excuse to use some racist term? Please choose your examples more wisely, and please consider whether any examples need to be used at all. Drmies (talk) 13:56, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - First, I am actually sorry if the slurs I used as examples offended you; I tried not linking them, but I could have done a better job of presenting my argument in a less offensive manner. Second, I'm not sure the n-word is used "invariably" is these conversations, but that's from your experience. Third, I wish you could, like, not say that the reason I'm !voting is to drop some racial slurs, just for my personal entertainment. Voting in order to use a racist term is trolling, and that accusation is kinda serious. I'm sure that's not what you meant, but that's the impression I got at first. Lastly, I agree with most of what you've written below, I just wish people didn't jump to the conclusion that me not voting delete means that I'm a Trump supporter. L293D (☎ • ✎) 14:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should be running around dropping racial epithets to make a point like some 4chan edgelord. That is not what WP:NOTCENSORED means. Use some common sense, if you've got any. Praxidicae (talk) 15:04, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I am trying hard to assume you aren't meaning what you said, but now you two have said that I'm a dude who comments solely to use racist terms, a dude who "runs around dropping racial epithets", a 4chan edgelord, and a guy who has no common sense, or very little. If we're going to have a constructive argument, I suggest you word your comments slightly more on the polite side. L293D (☎ • ✎) 15:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is the worst dab-page I've ever seen: the term occurs in none of the linked articles (L293D, I know most of the content isn't yours). I don't disagree with L293's creation of it, but it needs to occur somewhere in order to have some validity--and the coverage ([1], [2], [3], [4]) is clear: its only legitimate target here on Wikpedia is something pertaining to Trump and his use of the racist term "China virus" (and, apparently, a racist meme by his son about this particular term). In other words, it has to point not to the virus (reliable sources don't use it to point to the virus or the disease) but to Trump--at least one of them. I'm sure in our million articles on Trump there's one about "Trump and COVID-19" and that is where this should point, with an explanation in the text of the racist term (maybe in the context of his comment a day or so after the "China virus" in which he expressed support for our fellow Asian-Americans who were being smeared without acknowledging that he was the one who had smeared them) and a source or two. Drmies (talk) 14:04, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NEO. This is just a neologism. Hog Farm (talk) 15:37, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No reason for this to exist as an article or as the unsourced pseudo-disambig page it is at the moment. It could be mentioned somewhere else, but there's no case for a stand-alone article. XOR'easter (talk) 16:15, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.