" 

 == Answers == 

 You know, I know your reasoning behind wanting to redirect the page. Really I do. I just disagre with that reasoning, because I feel that it's a significant enough article to merit it's own article.  

 Anyway, to respond: 
 *I don't have any problem with people being able to track down a good, solid, neutral discussion of this term. 
 **I know this! 
 *I fail to see why that means it merits an article of its own. 
 **I have answered this already, but I feel that it is too long to include in an umbrella article, and it will unbalance the page.  
 *As Chip Berlet has pointed out, there are hundreds of instances in other encyclopedias where subreferences point people to sections within articles. 
 **Indeed. However, we are unique in many ways. We have umbrella articles which briefly summarise the main point of a topic, and they use  to point to a large article. It works quite well (I've used it on MDAC and Windows 2000, both FAs) 
 *One good reason to point people to sections within larger articles is the stark factual inaccuracy of the heading the article would have to employ. There is no Islamist anywhere who promotes the actual political doctrine of fascism. 
 **Indeed, I don't disagree with you. However we are detailing a neologism and how it is used. A title does not make us take a position. If that was the case, then I would leave the project because of the article Childlove movement. 
 *That means ""fascist"" in this case is serving the function of an insult quite consciously chosen for its ability to polarize and distract domestic political constituences. 
 ** I agree that this is the main reason for the term. This is the same with Christian fascism. This doesn't mean we can't document it. 
 *Which brings me to another good reason to point people to sections within larger articles  namely a certain moral responsibility among admins with functioning brains to prevent WP from becoming the #$%^&*() Newspeak dictionary, which is clearly the intent here. 
 **You are wrong. I am not here to censor anyone's content. I have no moral authority or responsibility to take a position on an article based on its content. If that were the case, I would have immediately killed off the following pages: 
 ***Holocaust denial 
 ***Gnosticism and the New Testament 
 ***Childlove movement 
 ***Historical persecution by Christians 
 ::Do you see the slippery slope I would be going down? 
 *Where is the stand-alone article for Blow job? 
 **If you can find enough information on this topic to warrant its own article, be my guest! Currently as it stands it's a slang term for oral sex and it's more than appropriate to incorporate it into this article. However, I'd encourage anyone who did proper research to a) redirect it to fellatio, and b) add their sourced material to it. 
 *...Zionazi 
 **Same deal. If you can find enough information, go ahead and expand the article? Before it was redirected, the article stated: 
 ***Zionazi: A word invented by those who hate Jews and wish to express their ultimate hatred of them by insinuating a connection with those who perpetrated genocidal mass murder upon the Jews. Most often used by those who are themselves admirers of Hitler. 
 ::As you know, that is original research. If voted for on AfD it would most likely be deleted. However, while we have no sources then it has been redirected. I encourage you to kill off the redirect and document the term correctly. Again, it's a particularly stupid term but if you can tell us who says it, why they say it, when they have said it, and where they have said it then this would be a valuable addition to our site. Of course, it would also be highly controversial. However, this is pretty much par for the course on Wikipedia. 
 *Fifth Column.  
 ** You've made a mistake here. See Fifth column. 
 *Do you seriously maintain that these terms are not notable, or that they are incapable of being adequately discussed within the articles to which they are redirected? 
 **Nope. 
 *So what's the difference between those terms and Islamofascism? I'll tell you what the difference is. The necons want this term front and center. So they go knocking on doors until they find someone who actually thinks he's acting responsibly by bending over for them. 
 **It's a zionist conspiracy I tell you! They've gotten to me. Quick, bring out the deprogrammers!  
 *Bad call, Ta bu. Seriously bad call. And the fact that someone like you made it is considerably more disturbing than the fact that they went knocking on the doors in the first place. 
 **Could you elaborate on what you mean by this?  
  "