Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IMSCF Syndrome (2nd 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 delete. —bbatsell ¿? 04:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IMSCF Syndrome

IMSCF Syndrome (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

This article consists entirely of original research. There are no reliable sources available for this term, only blogs and internet forums. MichaelJLowe 02:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• delete as per nom. (MichaelJLowe 02:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC))
• Delete: WP:V, WP:RS. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:CB. Possible WP:HOAX violation. Possible violation of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (outtakes)#Wikipedia is not funny. I thought it was! Notice that if you follow the impressive-looking source links, they're either nonexistent or they map to an "article" mocked up on someone's personal site. Weak Delete, currently appears to be weakly sourced, may possibly meet criteria with additional sourcing. Of the four articles listed, the Sunday Times Manila link doesn't work, and the "Philipino Identity" article link appears to be going to a personal web site, but the other two links work. In the Phillipino Express link, the second article, not the one that appears first, appears to be the one intended. The American Chronicle link mentions mestizo envy but not the syndrome as named. I regret perceiving these links as not being in WP:Good faith. --Shirahadasha 04:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. While it is not an academic term, it (and similar terms) is an informal, cultural term that is used by some in the Filipino-American community. The phenomenon outlined in the article has gone by other names, most notably "Tia Carrere syndrome" during the 1990s. Whatever name it goes under, the fundamental concept involved is the denial of one's Filipino heritage and many articles have been written in Filipino-American publications. I would support a renaming, but under what title I do not know. --Chris S. 04:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unless reputable sources (newsletters, magazines, etc.) are presented. --Howard the Duck 04:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Keep. I found that these articles on PDI 1 2 mention the term. Michael Tan, the author of the articles, is a Filipino anthropologist with a regular column in the said newspaper. I saw the term here as well but I haven't read this paper yet and the article seems to be "tainted" with Internet sources.
  • Comment My Google search yeilded forums that accuse Jasmine Trias with this syndrome. I don't know if this info would be useful for the AfD.Lenticel 05:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment Well, the first article Michael Tan wrote didn't really delve into IMSCF Syndrome. This was explained in the second article (he didn't have enough space daw in the 1st). Interestingly, the 2nd article says:

IMSCF syndrome

Now the truth why I’m doing another column on origins. I had a subtitle in last Wednesday’s column that read “IMSCF syndrome,” but didn’t quite get to discuss the syndrome for lack of space.

So just what is this syndrome? One of my graduate students, Christine Ajoc, alerted me to this term in a paper she submitted for my biological anthropology class. It means “I am Spanish-Chinese-Filipino syndrome,” and it is common among overseas Filipinos living in North America. Among Filipinos in Hawaii, there’s another variation where they claim Hawaiian ancestry as well.

The term actually appears in a legal website, dictionary.laborlawtalk.com, and is described as “ethnic forgery” because that mixed ancestry is fabricated. The dictionary entry speculates that this falsified pedigree reflects the lack of a national identity among overseas Filipinos and the need to boost their social status by claiming to have Spanish and/or Chinese blood. Somehow, Filipino takes on connotations of being poor, of being inferior.

It seems even Michael Tan didn't know the existence of this "phenomenon" or term until it was introduced to him by a student. Which is not enough in my opinion to merit as a reference for this article. Had Michael Tan himself researched and verifiably proved the existence of the term through a survey or some anthropological study he conducted, this article would stand. But a paper from a graduate student? I don't think that's enough. And it is said it is common among overseas Filipinos living in North America but hey, if it was actually that common, wouldn't there be more reputable third-party sources?

As for the 3rd link, the word IMSCF Syndrome appears in a column (?) or opinion (like youngblood of PDI?) Juvenile Answers By: Tyrone Jay V. Samson. It seems to me that this article is based on this link, quoting:

Aside from colonial mentality, there’s also this IMSCF Syndrome. This is a non-academic term that relates to a unique form of institutionalized identity crisis phenomenon seen amongst overseas Filipinos. IMSCF Syndrome specifically refers to the tendency of many Filipinos, when questioned about their ancestry and nationality, to recite the phrase “I’m Spanish, Chinese, Filipino”. The name of the syndrome itself is an acronym formed from the first letters of this recited phrase.

If this is a reference, well, I find it laughable. All in all, this "syndrome" or "phenomenon" might really exist (in the minds and consciousness of Fil Ams abroad) but really, IMSCF Syndrome does not belong to Wikipedia until a more reputable and credible source crops up. Berserkerz Crit 12:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, unless something definitely convincing comes up as a source. --- Tito Pao 07:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and Merge. This article is trivia (it's stated that it is a non-academic term) and it is informal term in Pilippines' society per Chris'. So it's better to be merged as one section in Ethnic groups in the Philippines provided with reliable sources. — Indon (reply) — 09:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Delete. Ok I must admit, this article is cleverly presented as reputable, verifiable and factual. In reality, this is a non-existent "phenomenon" and unverifiable term. It is disguised with supposed references and external links which will purportedly support the claim of the validity of this syndrome. I've checked the references, and nothing directly refers or talks about IMSCF Syndrome. The references are about facts alright, but facts about different topics like the percentage of Spanish/Chinese, the Catalogo for names, and American colonial mentality. I am really appalled but dazzled by the absurdity of this article, because to uncritical Wikipedians, it will really seem fit for Wikipedia. The External Links do not provide as well an answer to who coined the IMSCF Syndrome, or what it is, or why it has been said. If it is a common non-academic term, why do Google and Yahoo hits only show for the ten most related links http://en.wikipedia.org/IMSCF_Syndrome and mirror sites like answers.com copying Wikipedia?? And to even put as External Links forum discussions just goes to show the lack or want of references to support this article. Laugh out loud. IMSCF Syndrome??!! I've never heard that in my entire life as a Filipino who reads PDI and Phil. Star daily, watches TV Patrol and 24 Oras nightly, and follows up on news in the internet about any Filipino, including Jasmine Trias. No reputable third-party or even primary sources, original research, POV, weasel words, and so forth and so on. Berserkerz Crit 11:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, needs independent sources to prove that this term is notable, unverifiable, non-notable. Terence Ong 12:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, informal term used by many and is anecdotally observed both within the Philippines and abroad. Needs references but is notable enough that a references needed tag is sufficient at this time.--Chicbicyclist 21:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. I reject the idea that "non-existant pheonomenons", or any other ideas which individual editors may disagree with, even ones proven false (ie hoaxes), are not allowed on WP, since it's been made abundantly clear in WP:DEL (with the support of WP:NPOV) that the threshold for inclusion is notability--especially when established with multiple independent reliable sources. Given that, I think from the cursory searches that the term is a neologism that might pass the threshold of WP:N in the future. But it's not there yet, and even if it were there it would require a rewrite because of WP:OR issues. hateless 22:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Per Berserkerz Crit. Anyone who is claiming this article is notable clearly doesn't understand the notability criterion : topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself Topar 22:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• DELETE. The article is a clear violation of wikipedia's NPOV. This article shows how easy it is to write a biased article like this, cite references to opinions backing up the claim, and camouflage as a well-written, well-researched article that can standalone. With no scientific and academic basis, this is nothing but an opinionated article that needs to be deleted immediately. --Weekeejames 01:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
• Merge. I think parts of thearticle can be used to further explain the Filipino (identity) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 23prootie (talk • contribs) 12:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC).
• KEEP - and DEVELOP FURTHER. While it may be insignificant ratio wise in the Philippines vis-a-vis other countries, it still is a "culturally" significant "reality" or "possibility" that must be taken into consideration either for purely academic exercise or information dessimination, but mostly also for cultural consciousness and awareness. I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO GIVE THIS ONE A CHANCE. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pinay06 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 20 January 2007 (UTC).
  • The issue is not insignificance, but verifiability. Wikipedia can only rely on secondary sources of research because its an encyclopedia, which can only be a summary of past research and cannot present new research. WP does not allow original research; WP is not a vehicle to further a cause. Once such research is found then we can then have an article. hateless 00:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Still Weak Keep plus Major Cleanup. First of all, I only mentioned those articles because they contain the term. I am not saying that they are reliable sources, what I'm trying to say is that its existence is acknowledged even in the Philippines. The term is non-academic so its not surprising that nobody in the Social Science section of the academic world found time to seriously research about the subject. Do they have journal articles for every Internet meme out there? Surely it is a fertile field in the study of human social behavior. This term describes a behavior that exists in the minds of Filipinos around the world. As a Filipino, I know that this term is quite incensing but deleting the article would not make it go away.Lenticel 11:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unless there are academic sources (i.e. articles in peer-reviewed journals) that have studied this. Another suggestion is to merge the content with an article that describes the wider psychological phenomenon of trying to dilute one's ethnicity in certain situations. I don't know what the proper psychological term for that is but I am sure this phenonomenon is not confined to Filipinos. Barring that, turning this into a section of Filipino people might also be ok. --Polaron | Talk 16:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per Berserkerz Crit. Checking out the references supplied I see no direct references to the syndrome, or its name and origins. Warrants immediate deletion as it appears to be original research as defined per WP:OR. An informal non-academic term like this one has no place here. There is really only one source, and fails WP:NEO and WP:RS too. Ohconfucius 02:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Delete As a Filipino-American, I find that this article pushes the personal beliefs of some Filipinos regarding their cultural heritage as fact, and belittles those who do not agree with them. Also, the links are of highly dubious quality (unencyclopedic sources) and much of the article is constituted as original research.--Folksong 06:46, 22 January 2007 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.