Evangelistic atheism is regrouping.
It took a well-publicized shot with the Four Horsemen of the "New Atheism" (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Dennett), but that seems to be largely blowing over. The recognition, including from many prominent atheists, is that that argument-based approach was mostly helpful in deflating the confidence people of faith might have in their own argument-based approaches. But new atheism was forced into its own reductionism and fundamentalism. The "religion" it opposed had to be narrowly defined. In the end, the Big Four gave fellow atheists heroes to cheer for and gave some Christians villains to boo or gave other Christians "food for thought." But because the substance of their attacks largely boiled down to sneering rather than serious engagement, they seemed doomed to a short shelf life.
Others are ramping up. A survey of atheistic approaches gets lengthy attention in the New Yorker (the only kind of attention the New Yorker ever gives). And the online New York Times blog "The Opinionator" gives particular attention to a philosophy professor at Columbia, Philip Kitcher and his take on how atheists can undermine believers on experiential, not just cognitive terms.