Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anarchism in India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 No Consensus to delete. Davewild (talk) 16:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anarchism in India

Anarchism in India (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article is part of a series of articles created by User:Otolemur crassicaudatus [1] that have several problems. 1. There are precisely zero Reliable Sources that back up any of the assertions made about Anarchism in India.The only "source" offerred is a forum post. 2. The article, in it's entirity, is Original research a Synthesis of unrelated facts written semi-intelligently in order to push a particular agenda. 3. This article, together with several articles created by this user, constitute POV-forks of existing articles. These POV forks are being edited by the user with what clearly is a tendentious intent to disparage it's subject (India and Indians). Thus, I nominate these unencyclopedic article for deletion Ghanadar galpa (talk) 22:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment surely there is an anarchist movement in India? AnteaterZot (talk) 23:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, though this article is in need of help, the claims presented here could use some help as well. First, the source provided for the article is not a blog, as Ghanadar claims, but a book published by Zabalaza Books. The text of it just happens to also be posted on raforums.info. This article has the potential to become good part of a series on anarchism in different regions of the world, including Anarchism in Spain and Anarchism in Cuba. All the other problems can be fixed better by good editing than cold deletion. Murderbike (talk) 23:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete "In India, anarchism never took the form of formally named "anarchism"." This article is not talking about Anarchism in India, but about what the article's creator believed to be similar to anarchism. Zazaban (talk) 00:07, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Commment actually, it's talking about what Jason Adams, the author of the source given percieves as anarchism. Murderbike (talk) 00:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Comment This delete vote is based on fallacious reasoning; we are not voting on whether the article as it stands is worthy of keeping, but whether the subject merits inclusion in the encyclopedia.
  • Commment actually, it's talking about what Jason Adams, the author of the source given percieves as anarchism. Murderbike (talk) 00:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep: The subject is part of an established series on anarchism by region, and is the subject of at least two non-trivial reliably sourced academic treatments, the books The gentle anarchists : a study of the leaders of the Sarvodaya movement for non-violent revolution in India by Geoffrey Ostergaard and Melville Currell, Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1971, and Anarchist Thought in India by Adi Hormusji Doctor. Anarchism in India is further referenced in Dillon's "The Perennial Appeal of Anarchism" in Polity, Vol. 7, No. 2. (Winter, 1974), pp. 234-247. I recommend a little stronger due diligence googling before nominating for deletion in future. Afd is not cleanup. Skomorokh incite 02:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep:Nominanation of this article for deletion is cleary due to malicious intent. The nomination of this article for deletion is part of the serial attacks on my articles by user Ghanadar galpa. This article has nothing to do to disparge subject. This article is part of the broader anarchist movement. In wikipedia there are articles like Anarchism in Brazil, Anarchism in China, Anarchism in England, Anarchism in France, Anarchism in Israel which depict anarchist movements on those specific countries. Thus this article depicts the anarchist movement in India.Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 10:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment I would request Mr. Crasicaudatus to please calm down and not resort to histrionics. There is no vast evil conspiracy against him, unlike the anarchists would have people believe :-) .This debate is clearly going well, and valid points are being raised by all parties concerned.The main point here is that one or two sources are not enough to establish what the subject of the article tries to convey (i.e that there is a systematic anarchist movement going on in India). I would like a source that makes this explicit claim, rather than a disparate set of sources strung together by the author of the article to advance the notion that there is an anarchist movement in the country worth noting. As far as I can see from the article itself, there isn't, not as much as the other countries on which anarchism articles do exist. Ghanadar galpa (talk) 11:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment More issues: Statements like "the Satya Yuga is a description of a possible anarchist society in which people govern themselves based on the universal law of dharma", one of the key statements that form the backbone of the article, is puzzling. Is Mr. Crasicaudatus trying to use wikipedia to write a research paper on anarchism, or is he actually citing a reliable source here? Where is it? 99% of the article is such synthesis. If this article (which has been around for a while now), can't pick up any reliable sources that state that there is any noteworthiness to any alleged anarchist views and attitudes in India in the context of standard (western) definitions of the term, then the article is clearly junk. The notion of political anarchism is an entirely western one, and applies primarily to western or strongly westernized societies (like Cuba and Israel, and even non-western China, where anarchism is a by-product of European Communism applied to Chinese society). Some scholars have tried to fit the mold of anarchism into existing political movements in Indian history, but that is all supposition and interpretation. It's armchair reasoning at best. I fail to see anything in the article that describes that a strictly anarchist movement as it is understood literally by mainstream sociologists exists in India (or ever existed in the past). Hell, if someone publishes a paper alleging that the Toltec Empire may have been based on ideas similar to "anarchist principles", would we immediately have an Anarchism in the ancient Toltec Empire article? On the other side, I have read sociologiss saying that the Indian Freedom Movement was predominantly organized capitalism, others saying it was predominantly Communist, others (American neoconservatives basically) saying that it was fascist. Now we have some saying that it was anarchist. What was it exactly? Could it be that it was neither of these things, and that people are merely trying to fit their notions into it? Why should the idea that it was "anarchist" be given special priority over the other views? Ghanadar galpa (talk) 11:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Comment, for what it's worth, someone from the Indian National Party wrote an article titled The Growth of Revolution in India for the explicitly anarchist magazine The Blast. Murderbike (talk) 19:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Comment, regardless of the potential anarchic qualities of the Toltecs, there is room in an Anarchims in India article for a subsection on anarchic interpretations of Indian political movements. While the bulk of the article should not be comprised of such information, its original publication lends itself to the article, and can at least be referenced. The article should be improved and expanded to encompass such interpretations within the context of any genuine anarchist project in the Indian subcontinent.--Cast (talk) 09:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, the speculations in the article are completely unrelated to the modern concept of Anarchism. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and should not be a place to launch speculations and discussions on hypothetical theories, even though such speculations might exist in a printed book. --Soman (talk) 13:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
    • If they're published in reliable sources, they aren't being launched and do have a place in Wikipedia.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Anarchism in India is a valid subject.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is a genuine article, for a genuine subject, that happens to have disingenuous content. Nothing we haven't seen before, and won't see again. It just needs editing.--Cast (talk) 09:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - The topic is notable. The article needs cleanup & various cleanup tags. --Lquilter (talk) 20:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete The topic is borderline interesting, but the author is a known pusher of dubious POV supporting various agendas. Ezhava (talk) 03:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Comment This is an argument about the user, not the article. Problems with the article do not justify deletion; why is this topic non-notable? Skomorokh incite 03:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Non-notable, meaningless topic. Anarchism is not a visible movement in India. The article content is unsubstantiated and vacuous. Malabarcoast (talk) 04:36, 11 December 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.