194:
So let's find some citations. The nominator says there are none in the article, isn't that a reason to attempt to find some rather than to delete? Certainly it is a "joke" or rather better a parody, parody used both by proponents of, and those disparaging, Biblical arguments on homosexually. But so
298:
This phrase from a slogan might deserve inclusion in an article about contemporary U.S. gay rights or the evangelical opposition to same, but does not appear to have sufficient in depth coverage (other than use) in reliable and independent references to satisfy
204:
172:
It became a joke, but from my past encounters with the phrase, the slogan sentence was not originally intended as a joke in the circles in which it originated (apparently 1970's evangelicals in the U.S.).
347:
136:
Not notable. The information on the expression is not cited, although it sounds reasonable. None of the sources explain anything about it. They just use the expression in one way or another.
218:-- I basically agree with the preceding comment: The phrase itself sees a fair amount of use, and has given rise to several spin offs and parodies. It could be better coordinated with
267:- Per Scott Mac., AnonMoos and OliverTwisted. Whilst missing citations can indeed be a problem, they themselves (or the lack of them thereof) are not a reason to delete an article..
129:
96:
91:
100:
243:. This phrase is pervasive, and not exclusive to religious sources. There have to be sources in the news coverage of this topic. --
83:
17:
406:
36:
405:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
141:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
195:
what? If it is notable, and I'd say there's plenty of evidence it is, then we can narrate political humour.--
254:
391:
375:
362:
337:
312:
290:
276:
259:
231:
210:
182:
163:
145:
65:
154:
per nom. There is no evidence given in the article that this expression was ever used except as a joke.
286:
240:
207:
196:
200:
137:
87:
383:– I see that this article now has a couple more citations than it did at the time of nomination.
331:
249:
244:
227:
178:
372:
358:
219:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
308:
159:
61:
271:
57:
203:
Google tells me the phrase was used in the listed media 13 times just in the last month
384:
79:
71:
325:
223:
174:
354:
117:
321:
304:
300:
155:
50:
399:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
348:
list of
Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions
124:
113:
109:
105:
371:-- Because Knowledge is NOT a dictionary, right?
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
409:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
346:: This debate has been included in the
320:— Gnews provides plenty of coverage for
7:
199:08:41, 23 December 2008 (UTC) See
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
392:05:31, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
376:09:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
363:10:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
338:16:16, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
313:16:04, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
291:12:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
284:- in line with the above. --➨
277:11:31, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
260:10:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
232:09:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
211:08:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
183:09:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
164:07:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
146:06:16, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
66:07:50, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
426:
402:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
44:The result was
390:
365:
351:
220:Anti-LGBT slogans
64:
417:
404:
389:
387:
352:
342:
334:
328:
324:of this slogan.
289:
275:
257:
252:
247:
201:urban dictionary
127:
121:
103:
56:
53:
34:
425:
424:
420:
419:
418:
416:
415:
414:
413:
407:deletion review
400:
385:
332:
326:
285:
268:
255:
250:
245:
241:Scott Mac (Doc)
208:Scott Mac (Doc)
197:Scott Mac (Doc)
123:
94:
78:
75:
51:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
423:
421:
412:
411:
395:
394:
378:
366:
340:
315:
293:
279:
262:
234:
213:
188:
187:
186:
185:
167:
166:
138:Northwestgnome
134:
133:
80:Adam and Steve
74:
72:Adam and Steve
69:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
422:
410:
408:
403:
397:
396:
393:
388:
382:
379:
377:
374:
370:
367:
364:
360:
356:
349:
345:
341:
339:
335:
329:
323:
319:
316:
314:
310:
306:
302:
297:
294:
292:
288:
283:
280:
278:
274:
273:
266:
263:
261:
258:
253:
248:
242:
238:
235:
233:
229:
225:
221:
217:
214:
212:
209:
205:
202:
198:
193:
190:
189:
184:
180:
176:
171:
170:
169:
168:
165:
161:
157:
153:
150:
149:
148:
147:
143:
139:
131:
126:
119:
115:
111:
107:
102:
98:
93:
89:
85:
81:
77:
76:
73:
70:
68:
67:
63:
59:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
401:
398:
380:
373:CaveatLector
368:
343:
317:
295:
281:
269:
264:
236:
222:, though...
215:
191:
151:
135:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
287:Candlewicke
322:notability
301:notability
58:delusional
386:Paul Erik
355:• Gene93k
239:: as per
327:MuZemike
251:Twisted
224:AnonMoos
175:AnonMoos
130:View log
62:kangaroo
381:Comment
256:(Talk)
97:protect
92:history
369:Delete
305:Edison
296:Delete
246:Oliver
156:Borock
152:Delete
125:delete
101:delete
272:neuro
128:) – (
118:views
110:watch
106:links
52:Jerry
16:<
359:talk
344:Note
333:talk
318:Keep
309:talk
282:Keep
265:Keep
237:Keep
228:talk
216:Keep
192:Keep
179:talk
160:talk
142:talk
114:logs
88:talk
84:edit
46:Keep
353:--
350:.
361:)
336:)
311:)
303:.
270:—
230:)
206:--
181:)
162:)
144:)
116:|
112:|
108:|
104:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
60:¤
48:.
357:(
330:(
307:(
226:(
177:(
158:(
140:(
132:)
122:(
120:)
82:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.