Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Decoloniality (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 keep. Consensus is that the topic is notable. (non-admin closure) b uidhe 02:59, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decoloniality

[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)

I ain't rightly sure what this is supposed to be, but it looks more like someone's college sociology paper than it does an article. Regardless, it cites only primary sources, appears to be one giant WP:SYNTH violation, and there isn't any indication of notability. Jtrainor (talk) 03:38, 20 June 2020 (UTC) Jtrainor (talk) 03:38, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 03:50, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to say nuke it. I would believe the topic is notable, given its discussion in reliable scholarly sources, but the article as written is very synthy, jargony, and self-referential, and most of it is about what decoloniality isn't. An option short of just WP:TNTing it would be to redirect to Coloniality of power and include a very small section on the idea of decoloniality, using something like this as a reference, but I'm not totally sure that the current article adds to anyone's knowledge. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:29, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a real field with tens of thousands of citations across several disciplines. See https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=decolonial&btnG=. Definitely notable. Decolonial feminism is a legitimate subfield in feminist theory, for example. That said, the article appears to be nowhere near ready for showtime. Jazzcowboy (talk) 12:19, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 21:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Typical wikilord nonsense. "If I, the overseer of all knowledge, don't know what this is, it must be nothing!" Decoloniality, rather obviously, is a response to Aníbal Quijano's (and other's) concept of the coloniality of power. Looking at the state of those articles, it's clear this is an area not as well covered on the English Wikipedia. Quijano's page in Spanish, on the other hand, is far more developed. Go figure, a philosophy/ideology well-established in the global south (you know, just half the planet and the vast majority of the human population), is relatively unknown to the ethnocentric and grievously myopic West. As others have said, the topic is noteworthy, so just because it does not conform to whatever arbitrary formatting standards, doesn't mean it should be deleted. It just needs work. Alternatively, one might argue that it be renamed decolonial theory or decolonialism, both of which currently redirect to this page. I really wish someone would do some sort of research on the general white supremacist bias of EN-Wikipedia vis-a-vis the demographic makeup of its editors. Don't @me. KermitO (talk) —Preceding undated 18:53, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jazzcowboy. This an important idea in sociology scholarship, and I don't know what the nominator means by primary sources. If it's that they tend to be from scholars in this area, that's completely benign for an academic subject. I will say that the article indeed needs serious attention in terms of structure and formatting, which I'll try to help with. We also need to sort out the subject's relationship with Coloniality of power, Anti-imperialism (where Anti-colonialism redirects) and, to some extent, Decolonization, which we define much more literally, but I frequently see used in this context. --BDD (talk) 16:20, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've completed an initial review with an eye towards providing structure, integrating wikilinks, and clarifying language. Since the subject is detailed and academic by nature, it's tough to come up with the right balance for a general encyclopedia, but I've done my best. Others should build on it, of course. --BDD (talk) 21:31, 23 June 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.