Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muzhik (2 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. Stifle (talk) 18:58, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Muzhik[edit]

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

=A regular Russian-language word without any particular usage in English language, other than calque in translations of old russian literature, to add russian flavor. The article is a dicdef. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. - Altenmann >t 15:20, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Pre-revolutionary Russian categorization combining elements of peasant, proletarian and Lumpenproletariat. For english usage as such, see, e.g. Muzhik and Muscovite: Urbanization in Late Imperial Russia. 24.151.116.25 (talk) 17:13, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This is still nothnig but a dictionary definition. Every language have words that cannot be 100% translated by a single English word. This does not make automatically it an encyclopedic concept. per WP:GNG, we need a significant coverage. So far there is no coverage beyound dicdef in any sources, included this book mentioned here. - Altenmann >t 15:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep "Muzhik" is not just a regular word, it is a cultural phenomenon, it is a key to understand Russian soul, Russian collective unconscious and Russian mass culture. Amidst people of traditional culture faith in Muzhik values is much stronger than faith in liberal values or any other. Article should be kept and developed.

Vadim Kiev (talk) 19:13, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I thought it was samovar, vodka and balalaika. Scholarly references, please. - Altenmann >t 15:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The importance of the article is also proven by the fact that it exists in 11 other languages, including German, French, Italian, Spanish and others.Vadim Kiev (talk) 17:42, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other wikipedias have other rules about their content. - Altenmann >t 15:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:DICDEF that is not important/notable in the scheme of things. Its existence in other language projects does not confer any special status - especially since the notability requirements and other policies are much more strict on the English Wikipedia (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:08, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:DICDEF is not a reason to delete. The point of that policy is to cover topics under a common title rather than having separate pages for each headword. That would indicate merger to serfdom in Russia and there is already a relevant merge tag on that article. But there seems to be more to the topic in that a muzhik is now stereotype of behaviour too - rather like redneck or yokel. See Ode to the Russian muzhik, for example. Warden (talk) 11:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Googling the word (links above) shows that it is sufficiently common in English language sources. Also agree with arguments by Vadim Kiev.My very best wishes (talk) 21:43, 30 July 2013 (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.