Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Left-wing fascism (2nd nomination)

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 no consensus. –MuZemike 22:36, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Left-wing fascism

Left-wing fascism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics

)

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

Article appears to be a synthesis of sometimes contradictory statements made by different authors. Should either be merged with

• Keep - The article describes a term that is in common usage, is researched, and is notable. I can't really see why it was renominated in the first place. --Yachtsman1 (talk) 02:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because it's not a coherent concept. Each of the four writers who are cited using the term use completely divergent meanings. Dramedy Tonight (talk) 02:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as synthesis; the sources can't agree on what the term means. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 02:54, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Three or more different definitions of an ideology doesn't make a comprehensive, clear ideology. Merge with Fascism, if notable enough. --UNSC Trooper (talk) 10:49, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - What next,
  Fascist (epithet) and redirect this to there. Tarc (talk) 13:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:35, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - POV trojan horse. Carrite (talk) 18:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - synthesis. I could see a short paragraph on this at
  Fascist (epithet), but it does not rate more than that. Blueboar (talk) 22:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Keep - This is properly sourced analysis of a commonly used term to describe the use emulation by the left-wing of certain elements of facism. While this article is certainly controversial, that alone does not justify its deletion. I'm not sure why this article has been nominated for deletion again. Regarding Tarc comparison to "Right-wing Communism" - it is not valid because that term has not been commonly used (or used at all, to the best of my knowledge).(Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:18, 19 August 2010 (UTC))[reply]

  I was pointing out the absurdity of the concept; it is just a trivial insult that makes about as much real-world sense as my suggestion does. Tarc (talk) 23:43, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - there are plenty of references in published sources for a useful article, it really isn't that hard to find. For example, this one seems like a pretty definitive source. Ofcourse this article can be improved, but I'm gobsmacked it is being considered for deletion. --
  talk) 06:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• rewrite - plenty of resources but non-coherent. SYSS Mouse (talk) 17:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• keep and re-write - as Martin rightly pointed out, there are plenty of scholarly sources for this topic. I agree, though, that the current state of the article is not satisfactory. But what we have is just a beginning, the term is valid. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 18:22, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, article deals solely with a pejorative, which is generally a bad article subject basis for wikipedia. That said, there has been leftwing (in a relative sense that is, just like there was a
  National Syndicalism, Strasserism, National Bolshevism, etc. largely covers this field). --Soman (talk) 22:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep if it is substantiated then it should remain irrespective of what we might think of the worth or the subject (or the quality of the writing). My reading of the article is that it was not refering to National Bolshevism or is in away relating to fascism as generally understood. If we delete this then why not islamofascism, isn't that equally a pejorative and not really about fascism as generally understood?--Utinomen (talk) 22:48, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - a common perjorative. It's certainly valid to have an article discussing a perjorative such as this, there's more to write than a mere dictionary entry. TheGrappler (talk) 02:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The use of the concept in the RW may sometimes be incoherent, which leads to a certain amount of inevitable confusion in writing about it, but it is notable none the less and very adequately sourced. DGG ( talk ) 03:39, 26 August 2010 (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.