Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caucasophobia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. mikka (t) 16:06, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Caucasophobia

• del. Neologism. original research. non-English term. mikka (t) 08:12, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Week delete - not notable (54 google hits), but the sites that do report on it make it seem like it is a legitimate deal in Russia. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson 08:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • So what? Do we have chinophobia (not the same as cinophobia) or japanophobia or Balkanophobia articles? BTW google says that pnigerophobia exists! mikka (t)

It would be Sinophobia not chinophobia. ~~~~ 11:25, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Which is a redirect to racism. mikka (t) 23:47, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Very legitimate topic, but a renaming could possibly be in order.--Pharos 09:19, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It is about "prejudice/racism regarding people from the Caucas". I am not sure what could possibly be more appropriate than "Caucasophobia". ~~~~ 11:28, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Keep Seems notable and legit -CunningLinguist 09:47, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep As it was said in English language "Caucasophobia" is yet neologism. It is present in Russian language for along time though, and it is form of discrimination which is different from ordinary xenophobia (Check Russian search engines for Кавказофобия please). Being different from ordinary xenophobia the Caucasophobia shell be specified for a same reasons why anti-Semitism or phobia of Poles are considered (rightfully) a separate issue. Besides the term is already widely popular among critics of President Putin's regime, and is widespread in Russian publications(both mass-media and academicals) . Eventually it is used more and more often in English. Even if contains of “caucasophobia” will be deleted now it will become necessary to write something about it again. So what’s a point of removing the term only to put it back within few years if not few month?. Jumber 10:18 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • New but hyperactive account trying to defend boiling POV in the article, e.g., at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. mikka (t) 00:20, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • All what you have said does not change the fact that in English language (we are an English wikipedia, aren;t we?) it is a neologism. When this "eventualy" happen, then welcome the article. And the point is that wikipedia is not crystal ball. We don't know what will happen in even few days, not to say years.mikka (t) 17:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • The word is existing in English language already including very serious publications. Lets say someone will find it the “Migrantophobia, Caucasophobia and Anti-Semitism” address by Dr.Kohiro Matsuura director general of UNESCO or at the materials of UCSJ or tons of other materials(see Google). Then some person who is studying the issue will turn to wikipedia to find out what caucasophobia actually means.. And will find nothing at all. Unless you will write the article again. It would be easier reediting it though. (Unsigned comment by 80.126.57.218 (talk · contribs))
• Keep, seems to be a legitimate topic. Martg76 10:19, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Definitely exists. See Chechnya. ~~~~ 11:25, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Appears to be a notable topic. Capitalistroadster 12:30, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Notable topic, but original research full of POV. The best example why wikipedia's policy is against original research: valid topic is turned into anti-Russian propaganda. It is especially interesting that the article presents some links as "caucasophobic", when in fact they are sympathetic to caucaus peoples; e.g., stating such fact that vast majority of caucasian market merchants are poor people that work for rich bosses, etc.mikka (t) 19:42, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I disagree. The both articles are extremely hostile for particlar ethnical group, in that case Caucasians who reside in Russia; and both article's blame those people for simply who they are. Both articles show deep disrepect to the culture and social costums of Caucasian people and clearly state the desire to segregate ethnic Caucasians from mainstream Slavic population of Russia, particularly from Moscovites. (Unsigned comment by 80.126.57.218 (talk · contribs))
• Delete non-English term + biased article full of exaggerations (Fisenko 15:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC))
• Delete Never heard of. ConeyCyclone 17:45, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please type the word in any search engine, preferably the Russian version of it( Кавказофобия ). You will find that word many mainstream sources regarding Caucasian-Slavic relations . Many articles in Russian media or even academic researchers use the word as well. Apparently materials and articles containing the word caucasophobia will keep appearing in wikipedia articles, especially the ones regarding minority rights in Russia and conflict in Chechnya. So if you delete it now, what you going to do, re-write it again when some materials containing the word will appear here, or monitor an delete any mention of this term in future publications and translations from Russian? (Unsigned comment by 80.126.57.218 (talk · contribs))

• Delete - neologism. --Pjacobi 17:47, 2005 Jun 12 (UTC)

If neologisms are considered not interesting for wiki users then it should be deleted. Otherwise I do not see any grounds for deleting an article; as a matter of fact I am surprised someone wanted to delete such useful sourse (Unsigned comment by 80.126.57.218 (talk · contribs))

• Keep, exists in Russian language, so not a neologism. Kappa 19:41, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep but cleanup. This is a very legitimate topic, and Wikipedia:Neologism explicitly states that "Wikipedia does not accept fan-made neologisms unless they have realistic evidence of existence via search engine hits." Кавказофобия yields about 1,000 hits, which is quite massive for such a specific word. Besides, Caucasophobia is a relatively recent phenomenon, or a relatively recent expression of an older phenomenon. It's hardly possible to describe it without using neologisms. Aecis 19:43, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  It is not a job of a wikipedian to "describe" what he sees in the street. It is a job of a expert to collect the knowledge. A wikipedian may only report the knowledge collected by experts. Otherwise the whole wikipedia will quickly turn into a pile of bullshit. mikka (t) 19:48, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  I agree with you that Wikipedia should not become a load of personal social analyses of well-intending users. But that does not mean that Wikipedia can't describe what is happening out there. That's why we have articles like racism, afrophobia, islamophobia, homophobia and what have you. The worsening (how's that for a euphemism?) relations between the government of the Russian Federation and rebels in Chechnya has led to what can be described as caucasophobia among the people of Russia. I don't know if caucasophobia is the best word available. If there is a better word for it, the article should be moved to that title. But it is real, and imho it is notable enough for Wikipedia. Aecis 20:17, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Aecis why don't you vote then? (Unsigned comment by user:Jumber)
    • I have already voted, thank you very much. Aecis 11:04, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Exactly. The word is already present in the language of experts(check any search engine). So what is the reason to delete it? (Unsigned comment by user:Jumber)

  Why can't describe: the key word here is verifiability. I have no reason to believe your description, i.e., your interpretation what you see, thank you. In fact, I have no reason to believe anything you write. But here is important difference, watch: I can ask you for reference. What reference suggests the author of the current article? Blogs? Newspaper clips? Photos where someone kicks someone else's ass? No kidding. I suggest everyone who votes "keep" to read about Wikipedia:what wikipedia is not, what is primary source, what is secondary source. mikka (t) 21:11, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • • "What reference suggests the author of the current article" The following reference: the articles from mainstream Russian media (Moskowskye novosty, available in any news stand aruond the world; Izvestia, currently biggest Russian newspaper; links to the media files about anti-caucasian violence; link to the official websites of Russian nationalistic political movements who stand for segregation between Russians and Caucasians; also here appeared official statements of UNESCO which I encourage to include in the artickle, see address by Dr.Kohiro Matsuura director general of UNESCO or at the materials of UCSJ please. Most imorptant is that word "caucasophobia" itself is already existing not only in the street laguage but also in the official statements and media files, which makes it not only legitimate but absolutely neccesary to include the term in wikipedia User:Jumber 23:21, 12 Jun 2005

      Please read Original research, primary source, secondary source articles. So far it is a wikipedian's theory about the alleged usage of the term. mikka (t) 00:27, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Keep Jinkleberries 19:53, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Note: Junkleberries is a new account today and voted 'keep' on 37 articles within a 7-minute period. This user also received a vandalism warning today. Tobycat 20:59, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Keep., cleanup. Term is not particularly common in English, but has been used in official documents and speeches and is the only English term for this real phenomenon. Article has POV problems but that's not a deletable offense. — Gwalla | Talk 22:27, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, neologism. RickK 22:41, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Verifiable and encyclopedic. Article needs cleanup. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 22:43, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• • What is "verifiable and encyclopedic" in an article full of conspiracy theories (about KGB being behind "Caucasophobia" ), full of omissions and exaggerations (propiska laws apply to everyone in Russia and have little to do with apartheid; marriages between Caucasian males and Russian females are very common in for example Moscow, but the opposite is taboo in Chechnya; there is a huge difference in Russian public sentiment towards Chechens and the rest of people from the Caucasus region etc. etc.) ...? (Fisenko 05:27, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC))
    • The idea represented by the word may be encyclopedic notwithstanding POV problems. We need articles on slurs and kooky ideas, if they are widely known. These articles need cleanup to become NPOV Xoloz 05:31, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. Thought this would be racist trash but ended up learning something new about ethnic relations in Russia. Neutrality^talk 01:57, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Cleaned up version about the issue should be represented in WP, possibly in many articles, or, if in single article, under a different article name. This is neologism and non-English and should be deleted by definiton. Move and cleanup at a different name. Delete this. -Irpen 02:20, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and Cleanup This is a word transliterated from a Russian original that garners 1,000 Google hits (per Aecis), which seems a lot for a Russian slur. The fact that it isn't an everyday word in English is irrelevant. It is useful to have articles written in English describing non-Anglophone topics. Otherwise, whole realms of learning might be excluded here because a language barrier is making cross-cultural understanding tricky. Xoloz 02:31, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. The neologism issue is something of an "idol of the marketplace" à la Francis Bacon, a logical confusion based only on the imperfection of language. Noone is disputing that the topic is generally legitimate, but only that "Caucasophobia" may not be acceptable as an English word, in which case something more long-winded but descriptive should suffice, e.g. Prejudice against Caucasians in Russia. Mikka and others have also argued that some of the content is incorrect or exxagerated, in which case it should simply be improved, not deleted entirely.--Pharos 07:34, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Is it possible to make an article under the Greek name in the English Wiki? If so, both "Caucasophobia" and Prejudice against Caucasians... could be redirects, the first on the ground that it is a reasonable transliteration. This way, a "new English word" would not be the main article title. Xoloz 08:51, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep I am not the specialist in Russian affairs(I came here through Nick's artistic page); but I see here are two problems: one is with some people who argue that the anti-caucasian discrimination does not exhist,and others argue that the world does not exhist at all. Now the word DOES exhist in English language so English wikipedia should have at least few sentence about what it means. Then users can be redirected at the page about discrimination of Caucasians. Conteins of that last page can be discussed. Erin23
  • One more newcomer... mikka (t) 15:34, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Wow! Somebody was complaining about "conspiracy thesis"..:) (Unsigned comment by user:Knutson)
• Keep You should not be surprised that "new people" are coming in; the contains of this article and the fact that it is about to be deleted was send around to few human rights groups who check the situation with Caucasians in Russia, and to some pro-Caucasian activists so you may expect some new guests and their opinion...But are we "guests" after creating the account?).About the discussion: I am surprised that someone was bold enough to put it at the deleting list! I mean-the word "caucasophobia" does exist, it does makes sense, it is available in the literature, and is even available in some dictionaries. As matter of fact it has two meanings: one is term to describe prejudice against Caucasian minority in Russia and another is a term used by American right-wing to describe the anti-white racism, which according to them is existing in the American society(would it be imaginary or real). To delete an article about the existing word simply because it hurts someone’s feelings is purely a vandalism! About the article itself: it is absolutely accurate observation if you ask me, but I can understand the hurt feeling who prefer to believe that problem does not exist. Anyway there are lot's of links provided to back the point, and most make sense(too bad many people here do not understand enough Russian).

Solution: to keep the short explanation of Caucasiophobia here, and to create a link to the article about anti-Caucasian discrimination, where we can move this article and also some parts of Chechnya section.And short note about "conspiracy theory". Accusing Western law enforcements and intelligence agencies ploting to conquer the World is a theory. Accusing FSB and it's ancestor, the KGB in the human rights violations isn't a "theory". It's a fact. Only recently FSB was officially blamed for two major criminal acts: the terrorist attack against Chechen poet Yandarbiyev in Qatar and attempted poisoning of the Ukrainian presidential candidate Victor Yuschenko with dioxine(spelling?). Plus here at this board one may fid tons of data about FSB being blamed for blowing up apartment blocks in Moscow in 1999 and 2000.(Just check FSB or Second Chechen War surely enough mikka being a Russian patriot(assumption based on his profile) has another opinion. Well we are here to talk. Musavatist 11:00 pm, 13 June 2005(UTC)

• • One minor detail Chechen "poet" Yandarbiyev was an international terrorist linked to Taliban and Al-Qaida ... he was official emissary sent by Chechen separatists to Mullah Omar and co. BTW To any sane person it is clear what "FSB being blamed for blowing up apartment blocks in Moscow in 1999 and 2000" is a conspiracy theory exactly of the same nature/credibility as conspiracy theories about CIA being behind September 11 attacks (the "evidence" for this is also abundant on the internet). The level of Russophobia desplayed here is rather disturbing. (Fisenko 05:35, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC))

Wrong assumption. Also, please be advised that wikipedia articles are not message boards to express opinions; they are about facts. Shall I start the Russophobia among Caucasian people that came to Moscow, but treat Muscovites as natural resource? Among any two nations that live by there are categories of people that hate each others. Former Soviet Union bragged it had over 100 nationalities. Shall we have 100x100=10,000 articles (and yes, multiplied by 2, for both direction of hate!) about how belarussians hated ukrainians, ukrainians hated belarussians, chukchi hated evenks, kyrghyz hated uzbeks, .....? Or shall we write a proletarian internationalistic one how everybody hated russians? And tell me: do Lithuanians like Georgians? Haven't been in Vilnius for 35 years, but last time I was there, a market guy with black hair and moushache and "aerodrome" cap got his ass badly kicked for cheating. mikka (t) 23:44, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If the term "Russo phobia" exists in documents and publications you should of course write an article about it instead of asking deleting this one. I also suggest to check Wikipedia:Deletion policy from where you may find out that if you have a dispute against articles content, which happens in both cases where you claimed VfD,here and in Nick Gabrichidze article, then you should not immediately ask for VfD but ask for Wikipedia:Requests for comment. If you have problem with verifiability please check Wikipedia:Verifiability instead of marking everything you dislike for deleting. Please reconsider your policy. If wikipedia users will start marking every article they dislike for deletion, then soon every hot topic will be marked with deletion marks and counter deletion marks. Do we need such chaos?Authors, 2.00 am Amsterdam time, 14 July 2005

• Keep. --Irishpunktom\^talk 23:51, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Important note: The content is changed according to the useful information(from your posts) and your suggestions The text now begins with: In North America where Caucasian refers to light complexioned people indigenous to, or descended from Europe, word caucasophobia is used mostly by American White supremacists, White separatists and afrophobes to describe the "anti-white racism", which according to them, is existing in the American society.

In common usage in the Europe, Asia and former USSR countries "Caucasian" is a collective term which refers to anyone descended from native ethnicities of Caucasus. Confusingly, in direct opposition to the most common colloquial English-language meaning of the word (so called "white-skinned" person in English meaning), the Russian language embeds certain stereotypes of Caucasian people. Typically, they are considered "dark", with nearly identically similar negative connotations to the Anglo-Saxon prejudice of "darkness" (http://www.tjetjenien.dk/baggrund/racism2.html) . Some people from the Caucaus refute these prejudices; others ignore them.

end of quote Authors, 9:49 pm,Amsterdam, 14/07/2005

• Rename "Racism in Russia" would be better name for topic and more in line with many other Russia topic articles named "Economics in Russia", etc. A broader article could usefully compare with attitudes towards Central Asians, Chinese, Blacks, etc. in Russia. Note Кавказ means Caucasus (noun), so Кавказофобия should translate to Caucasusphobia. The translation as Caucasophobia unnecessarily conflates it with American racial issues, and is likely to attract additions on this unrelated topic.--JWB 20:44, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Bill 09:32, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Possibly rename to Racism in Russia if that helps. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn touches on the hatred of people from the Caucasus in his book Cancer Ward. (Actually, its kind of what the book is about: cancer followed by death are the great equalizers of social status, highlighting the absurdity of racism.) linas 05:27, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Violence and hatred in Russia's new skinhead (caucasophob) playground

Fascism is vilified in Russia after the sacrifices the nation endured to defeat Nazi Germany. But a racist skinhead culture is on the rise - and it is becoming increasingly vicious Ell 19 : 46 pm, 19 June (UTC)

• Delete neologism and original research. 172 12:14, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep the page, but also keep the TotallyDisputed tag. freestylefrappe 00:37, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Strong rename to Racism in Russia, per Linas. Valid topic, but neologistic title. Radiant_>|< 14:31, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, possibly with rename/move, but considering this is an important thing in Russia, the very marginal American use of this word should not stand at the beginning but at the very end. Uppland 12:08, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.