Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eighty Years' War (1914-1995)

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was already rewritten and moved, just closing the old vfd. Scimitar ^parley 23:04, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Eighty Years' War (1914-1995)

This article breaks the Wikipedia:No original research official policy deeply by its title and subject. I can't find references to this theory on google. Andries 20:27, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

• Weak Keep - Perhaps this article has some educational value to it. UniReb 21:05, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete WP:NOR. Dunc|☺ 21:11, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete original research, and very silly at that... it's just listing random singular violent events from around Europe and arguing that they constitute a permanent state of war on the entire continent. - ulayiti (talk) 21:26, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Move to a better name - I've heard the theory that the period from the beginning of World War I to the fall of the Berlin Wall actually constituted a single war, and I suppose the Balkan conflict could be shoehorned into that idea... then again, I've heard that all of human history could be characterized as one long war. -- BD2412 ^talk 21:32, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
  • So that would be a war from 1914-1989, not from 1914-1995. Andries 21:46, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - unless a published scholar can be shown to have refered to an eighty years war between 1914-1995. Nolte doesn't count as he was writing in 1987. If there is no independent work cited for the specifics of the theory then it is original research. --Doc (?) 23:06, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Original Research. DavidH 00:39, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as original research. Capitalistroadster 01:44, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. No no no. Original research, and a flawed idea to boot. Sabine's Sunbird 01:46, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete original research. --Etacar11 01:52, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
• Possibly move to Short Twentieth Century, the "left-wing" attempt by Eric Hobsbawm to describe the 20th century as a whole (see Age of Extremes or the German Wiki). The (older) "right wing" theory of the European Civil War was described by Ernst Nolte. I thaught the (Dutch inspired) "Eighty Years"-description could be the more neutral version. I think all this is not so much a question of very original research, but of neologism indeed. If it is not allowed to create a "neutral neologism", I agree that the article should have another name. Anyway, in my view, Wikipedia can contribute to end the intolerance between "European left" and "European right", even make Europeans aware that their war ís (already) over (for ten, maybe fifteen years) and that their points of view can coexist, as well as catholicism and protestantism coexisted in the Dutch United Provinces after their Eighty Years' War. Karel Anthonissen 15:04, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

I could be persuaded by a move to Short Twentieth Century - and a clean-up and NPOV so the article recorded Hobsbawm's thesis - critiques and alternative views (offered by other notable persons with citations). But you need to note that WP is not a place for seeking to an 'end the intolerance' (as laudable as that may be) (see WP:NOT) --Doc (?) 16:09, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't remember the existing page Short twentieth century. What can be done? Karel Anthonissen 16:12, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Why don't you just merge your article with that one. You are the sole author of Eighty Years' War (1914-1995), so you can just use the text from that one, even if it is deleted, and work it into the other article. Short twentieth century is a better title anyway, as it can discuss the issue without limiting itself to specific years, which may vary between different historians. Tupsharru 19:56, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, perhaps some page moving needs to be done, but just because the two scholars referenced in the article are not from the US does not mean it's 'original research'. --zippedmartin 19:14, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
• I will vote keep just to outweigh some of the delete votes, but I'd actually prefer a merge of this material with Short twentieth century. Historians use the concepts of "short" and "long" centuries all the time. Another notable historian, Giovanni Arrighi, has actually proposed a "Long twentieth century". Tupsharru 19:56, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
• Rewritten and moved to Survey of the twentieth century, including this Long twentieth century-idea. Please try to improve. Karel Anthonissen 19:36, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
• The rewrite is OK but the section 'A(n) European eighty years' war' still consitutes Original Research - unless you can cite a scholar for this view --Doc (?) 19:48, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.