Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-capitalism

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. no consensus for deletion - any renaming or merging can be discussed on the talk page JForget 02:55, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-capitalism[edit]

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

See discussion at meta here. This page is blatant original research and synthesis. Either wipe and start over or just wipe. First Ghit is this very page. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 15:20, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but retitle to Opposition to capitalism. There is no one anticapitalist movement but the other title should fit in okay with WP standards, as they are applied. A more strict enforcement of "no original research" would knock this one and lots of others out, but that is not where the WP community is at right now. Steve Dufour (talk) 17:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question – The claim made in the nomination is that this list contains Blatant Original Research and Synthesis. The list is about movements or ideologies that are or have significant anti-capitalism elements. Given that, what are the Blatant OR and SYN parts of this article? The major anti-capitalism sources cited address all these list entries in some form. I have not reviewed every fact in the article, but none struck me as unverifiable or made up. Clearly more citations are needed , but that’s article improvement, not a reason for deletion. So restated a bit more succinctly, Where is the Blatant OR in this article?, in other words, what have the editors added to the major sections relative to Anti-Capitalism that is not verifiable in the Anti-Capitalism related references? In other words again, what new conclusions are they drawing, not supported by sources related to the subject. WP:SYN is equally clear about what Synthesis is as a WP policy. Where is the Blatant Synthesis in this article? What conclusions are the editors making from two or more sources that is not supported by a reliable source in its own right?. What position are they advancing that is not supported by sources. Whether or not it is Blatant WP:AGF, there may indeed be OR and SYN in this article, but the nominator has not yet made that case.--Mike Cline (talk) 20:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the nominator's reasoning was that various groups or ideologies that criticize capitalism are put together to create the new "thing": anti-capitalism. This would indeed be considered original research, but in my opinion the answer is to rename not delete the article -- as I said above. Steve Dufour (talk) 21:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:29, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are many forms (and degrees) of anti-capitalism -- to name a few, distributism, syndicalism, Marxism, socialism, communism, anarchism, anarcho-syndicalism, industrial unionism. This is a very significant topic, with plenty of good sources. If some part of the article needs sourcing, or even repairing, fine. Deletion? Absolutely not. Richard Myers (talk) 23:19, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment On the question of re-naming from anti-capitalism to opposition to capitalism — i have been in, or in contact with, the anti-capitalist community for more than two decades. The term "anti-capitalism" is used frequently. I've never before heard the expression "opposition to capitalism". Not saying such a change is improper or incorrect — just that the current expression has the weight of common usage. Richard Myers (talk) 23:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment To your excellent point Richard, renaming this list to Anti-capitalism ideologies and movements would make the title much more relevant to it actual content.--Mike Cline (talk) 23:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - This is a valid subject for an article, as proven by the links to anti-capitalist sources at the bottom. Poor quality is not a valid reason for deletion, nor is the first Ghit pointing here (example). --Explodicle (T/C) 17:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also be OK with a merge to Criticism of capitalism. --Explodicle (T/C) 15:23, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definite keep - Although it is a somewhat umbrella terminology, rather many wiki pages link to this article and it is perfectly valid; describes the movements that may (or may not) be opposed to capitalism. Since there are pages in wikipedia which seem much more relevant and questionable (for example things as an article for the "name" Jonh Smith, Average Joe, and many others with largely not relevant subjects belonging to popular culture), this should definitively kept. Only an authoritarian capitalist may ask for it's deletion.--190.174.64.243 (talk) 17:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)— 190.174.64.243 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Comment. I see no good reason for changing the name of the page. The term easily passes WP:NEO and isn't likely to cause controversy. See [1], [2], [3], etc. — Rankiri (talk) 17:37, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
keep nominators should know that 'needs improvement' is not reason for afd. clearly notable.--Buridan (talk) 20:54, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ottava Rima said on IRC, "those links are refering to Marxism/Socialism." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 21:40, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or redirect to Criticisms of capitalism I agree that this may constitute original research, and may not meet notability guidelines. Specifically, the article is stating what is anti-capitalism and what is not. The sources I checked don't use the word "anti-capitalism". To sum up each ideology as anti-capitalist, and not have some other reliable source that specifically says "(ideology here) is an anti-capitalist ideology" is original research. Each of these ideologies have their own page, and are better suited to quick mention on the criticisms of capitalism page. They would still have the original research issue, but at least it would be within a better context for discussion. —MutantPlatypus (talk) 06:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Anti-capitalism is a commonly used concept, is highly notable and needs a Wikipedia page. If it has problems it should be fixed. --OpenFuture (talk) 09:18, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious keep. This article is like most of Wikipedia's: it needs help. The solution is to jump in, not to press for deletion. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 12:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A merge with criticism of capitalism now seems more appropriate to me. Google Books indicates the two terms aren't sufficiently discrete to justify two articles. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 16:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think that is preferable to merging with Criticism of capitalism, because, on one hand, many of the points of criticism are shared by different anti-capitalist movements (different, for example, because they favour different alternatives to capitalism, or different strategies), while on the other hand criticism of capitalism need not be related to any kind of movement. I think, though, that the article should be renamed Anti-capitalist movements, corresponding to its actual content. I do not agree this is largely original research; most of it can be appropriately sourced. --Lambiam 22:28, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Bad nomination. AFD is not cleanup. Google news search at the top shows the term "Anti-capitalism" used in over two thousand news sources. Dream Focus 06:30, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but needs work. As per previous contribs, needs cleanup not deletion. The term "anti-capitalism" is in common usage and is without doubt notable enough for a page of its own. But the problem is that the article as it stands is not really about the movement most usages of the term refer to, but rather a list of ideologies that may or may not be described as anti-capitalist. I think most of the current content should be moved to Criticisms of capitalism, replacing or augmenting the section "types of criticism" there (and, of course, edited for better referencing, purging of OR, etc). And a new article needs to be written, that actually gives a concise encyclopedic account of what the common usage actually refers to, as in sources like Anti-Capitalism as an ideology... and as a movement and Rough Guide to the Anti-Capitalist Movement. BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:28, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notable subject as per above--Mike Cline (talk) 15:00, 5 March 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.