Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New New World Order (politics)

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2011 October 27.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. Owen× ☎ 14:35, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New New World Order (politics)[edit]

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

I am not convinced by the very subject of this page, which was created and completed just a few days ago. Although it is quite well-made on surface, and may give a favorable impression with its many sources, it gives me the impression of being an original research - or should I say an original synthesis - made up with elements which are certainly relevant on articles like soft power, multilateralism, New world order (politics), Foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration et al.

Searches on google books and google scholar were inconclusive about the notability of such a concept, and its relation with the foreign policy of the current American administration.

True, several authors have been using the expression "New new world order", but they have done so at different times, on different contexts, and in different assessments of american foreign policy.

IMHO, this looks very much like a WP:FORK and WP:Original research, basing itself on actual sourced facts, patched together under the umbrella of a non-notable concept and glossed over with a scholarly appearance. I think the term should be mentioned in New world order (politics), to stress the variations of that latter concept, but nothing more.

I may add that I also proposed for deletion the French version of this article on wp:fr. The result was a clear consensus for deletion, despite a campaign of abuse and personal attacks by an IP which may or may not have belonged to the (apparently bilingual) article's creator. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 14:24, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - see above. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 14:25, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - my own googling indicates that where this term is used, it is generally as a headline, and almost never in the body of a text. You would expect that if this were an established concept, it would often appear in the body of text, most likely with capital letters (as in the Wiki article). It's just not used that way. It's easy to be swayed by the academic appearance of the article but I agree that it doesn't have the requisite substance yet.Asnac (talk) 18:38, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Seems like POV-pushing to me, aggregating unrelated events and quotes in some kind of high falutin' original research. Enlisting here Ibn Khaldun as well as Arnold J. Toynbee may appear as creative editing, but doesn't really help. More specifically, I fail to perceive a single, consistent, well-defined concept behind this phrase of "New, New World Order". --Azurfrog (talk) 14:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:07, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - same as above - Wikigi | talk to me | 14:27, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Seems to be synth and OR. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:13, 10 May 2011 (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.