Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monitory Democracy

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 merge to John Keane. I'm going for a compromise here, which is a merge to the article on the author, with no objection to splitting out a section for the book, following consensus on that talk p. The term is a good redirect, and the mergedsection or new article will provide the information DGG ( talk ) 02:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Monitory Democracy

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

A neologism that was made up bv John Keane in a book he wrote in 2009. The word is pretty much only used by this individual, and doing multiple searches for the term only brings up this book, and other papers that the same author wrote. The article's only source is the book where the term was made up. Fails WP:RS, and WP:N, as it is just a neologism that has no widespread use, and no references that support any sort of notability. Rorshacma (talk) 21:23, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom. All 14 "referencers" are cites to the same book by John Kean. North8000 (talk) 21:52, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a neologism that hasn't received significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the person who coined the phrase. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:59, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:47, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. & WP:NEO.--JayJasper (talk) 20:54, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 21:51, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Leaning Delete~~ Comment - Many available sources are primary, with John Keane using the term. Here's some examples other than the references in the article as of this post, all written by John Keane: Monitory democracy and media-saturated societies, (John Keane) Monitory democracy resides in the China labyrinth, The China Labyrinth. However, significant coverage in reliable sources does exist, including this article from The Nation (Sri Lanka): Monitory democracy for better governance. Perhaps other editors can find additional reliable sources that cover this topic significantly? Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:48, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Umm, why not move content into John Keane (political theorist) if not independently notable?--Milowent • ^hasspoken 14:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:51, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning Merge to John Keane (political theorist) per this source: The Nation (Sri Lanka): Monitory democracy for better governance. (Struck "leaning delete" !vote above.) Any information in the merge should be sourced by this secondary source, which is independent of John Keane (not written by Keane), although some primary sources could also be used to verify information. However, if additional third-party reliable sources are found that constitute significant coverage, this !vote can change. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is something discussed. [1] So the concept gets coverage. It also is mentioned in many places, that don't mention Keane at all. He came up with the term, but its used enough to warrant its own article. Do college textbooks cover this term? Dream Focus 14:25, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The article that links to, however, is just another paper written by John Keane himself, which once again leads back to my original point that he seems to be the only one actually widely using the term. Doing a gsearch for the term, while specifically ommitting his name, only gives me a single hit. Since the concept is so central to his writing, I wouldn't be opposed to a merge or redirect to his own article. However, at this point, I'm still going to argue that there isn't enough to establish independent notability for it to exist as its own article. Rorshacma (talk) 00:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Your search methodology is flawed. It omits all works by other people who happen to write something like "the notion of monitory democracy (Keane, 2009) …". Uncle G (talk) 17:08, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to John Keane, since this is not notable enough to stand independently but is a logical part of that article.--Yaksar (let's chat) 07:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:02, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move to The Life and Death of Democracy, and repurpose as an article on a notable book which has had substantial reviews in major UK publications: Guardian, Telegraph and FT (needs reg/payment) Keane is an important writer but this isn't a concept that has its own life. --Colapeninsula (talk) 16:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ironically, putting this beneath Keane would be giving it a non-neutral treatment, since Keane's book is not all of the views of the subject by any means. Clive Gabay (Gabay 2010, p. 130–131) and Matthew Flinders (Flinders 2012, p. 44–46) have rather different views of monitory democracy to that of Keane. Yes, people other than Keane have written about this in books.
- Gabay, Clive (2010). "De-naming the Beast: the Global Call to Action against Poverty and its multiple forms of publicness". In Mahony, Nick; Newman, Janet (eds.). Rethinking the Public: Innovations in Research, Theory and Politics. The Policy Press. ISBN 9781847424167.
- Flinders, Matthew (2012). Defending Politics. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780191623738.
Uncle G (talk) 17:08, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- What you fail to mention, of course, is that in both of these works the concept is introduced and discussed as "Keane's monitory democracy".--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:35, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I "fail to mention" it because it is in fact a falsehood, as you will find out if you actually read the books. Not, in any case, that the simple and commonplace association of an idea with its inventor is in any way a rebuttal to the assertions that people other than Keane have written about this in books, and that it is non-neutral to omit their scholarly and significantly differing viewpoints by covering this with respect to Keane. Uncle G (talk) 20:51, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the term has no coverage outside the one book/guy. Mtking^(edits) 08:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd be embarrassed, myself, to write such a statement immediately below the citations of two other books that demonstrate in no uncertain terms the falsehood of that assertion. Uncle G (talk) 20:51, 14 March 2012 (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.