Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Democratic empire

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 12:12, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Democratic empire[edit]

[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)

This seems to be a straightforward case of Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The article consists of the definition of a term (itself simply the combination of two everyday words) and the assertion that the term has been applied to various empires throughout history. I can't verify the second of the two cited sources, but the first is a fairly vague pontification on the alleged wonderfulness of nineteenth-century colonialism.

At the moment, I believe the article meets deletion criteria 8 (in that it fails to meet WP:GNG: that is:

A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

There are two cited sources, one of which (Giddings' 1900 book on empires of his own time) is WP:PRIMARY, and both of which are only citing the fact that the US has been described as a 'democratic empire'. Per WP:GNG, this is a 'trivial mention' that does not establish notability. The remainder of the article seems to be almost entirely WP:OR.

Furthermore, the article also meets criterion 14 (any other content not suitable for an encyclopedia) per WP:DICTIONARY.

There are one or two examples in HQRS where the terms 'Democratic empire' or 'the Democratic empire' have been used as epithets for the United States, but I cannot find any significant discussion of the meaning, history or significance of those terms in themselves (as opposed to the US) which would qualify this article under WP:GNG. I can believe that an article on the perception or naming of the US as a 'democratic empire' can be written, or one on Giddings' 1900 book that seems to praise (allegedly) democratic empires, but this article is so far from being either of those that any such article would have to start by completely removing this one. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 12:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Reads as a defintion that combines the two terms with some original research rolled in. I don't see this as a notable topic as whole. Reywas92^Talk 19:50, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 May 8. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTDICTIONARY and WP:OR. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 11:45, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I disagree that this article amounts to a dictionary definition. It describes a political concept that appears to be notable enough to have been specifically written about by various scholars Jack4576 (talk) 11:53, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been able to find those scholars; could you give some examples? As I mentioned above, I don't think the Giddings book qualifies, at least as far as WP:GNG goes: the Münkler chapter cited does have the phrase in the title, but I can't access it directly and there isn't any evidence in the article that he discusses the term/concept (as distinct from the US 'empire' he uses it to describe) in that chapter. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 12:11, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per WP:NOTDICTIONARY and WP:ADVOCACY. Toddst1 (talk) 13:07, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It might be a term of approval or condemnation but it's not a topic that's received significant coverage, perhaps because it's not a very useful categorisation or a concept that has a great deal of explanatory power. Fails WP:GNG, also WP:NOTDICTIONARY (though it seems it's such a rare phrase, no dictionary includes it) and as an epithet and as Toddst1 points out, WP:ADVOCACY. NebY (talk) 13:41, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is made-up political gibberish. Nate • (chatter) 15:13, 8 May 2023 (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.