Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jewish Bolshevism

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. This discussion is a mess, but it's fairly clear that there exists no consensus to delete either of the nominated articles. In fact, I'd almost be inclined to rule a clear "keep" result for Żydokomuna, which seems only tangentially related to the main issue at hand. That said, there does seem to be nearly unanimous agreement that something needs to be done to fix the current duplication of content between The Jewish Bolshevism and Jewish Bolshevism. A sensible suggestion made by Racepacket, Kevin Murray and others, for which there seems to be at least some semblance of consensus, is that the article The Jewish Bolshevism should be cleaned up to only contain information on the pamphlet of that name, with the information of the political epithet and conspiracy theory merged (back) to Jewish Bolshevism insofar as it's not already present there. Once the two subjects have been cleanly separated, their respective notability can then be judged independently if necessary. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Jewish Bolshevism

The Jewish Bolshevism (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Much of this article violates WP:NOR and WP:NOT#LINKS and WP:NOT#GUIDE. This article is essentially a repeat of the contents of Jewish Bolshevism article and a third duplicate article using the Polish name of Żydokomuna. These duplicate articles should be merged into Jewish Bolshevism. The following related article is included in this nomination for the above reasons:

Żydokomuna (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Thanks, IZAK 10:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment. Is this a POV fork? —gorgan_almighty 12:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Have no idea what you mean. --Ludvikus 13:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, it is, and I have already told Ludvikus that this is inadmissible, but he refuses to comply, see my "comment" (no vote) below. `'Míkka 16:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge all to Jewish Bolshevism and subject to normal cleanup measures. The articles may indeed by anti-semitic, I haven't read closely enough to see. (On first glance I'm not sure where the anti-semitism is, unless it's now considered anti-semitic to mention the prominent role of some Jews in the founding of Soviet communism...!?) But the political epithet is highly notable, indeed, it's vital to understanding how the Nazi ideology prominently linked hatred of Jews with hatred of socialism. It's unfortunate that such articles may be magnets for unsavory POV, however, that doesn't obviate the necessity to cover the term as part of a complete and factual encyclopedia. And the correct title for coverage of that term, per WP:MOS, would be Jewish Bolshevism. <eleland/talkedits> 15:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
    • What's antisemitic is blaming the Jews by these statistics what the far out-numbering many millions of Russians, Ukrainians, Poles, and others, accomplished in maintaining and spreading Bolshevism and Communism. --Ludvikus 15:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
      • Of course that would be anti-semitic. I'm not sure I saw where that blame is assigned, at least not in Jewish Bolshevism in it's present revision. The article makes it clear that although "A high percentage of ethnic Jews in comparison to the percentage of the total population took an active part in Bolshevik movement...The number of Jews in top administrative positions began to decline soon after 1917. It continued to shrink heavily in the 1930s when Stalin had his old comrades Kamenev and Zinoviev executed...Stalin had eliminated virtually all Jews from very high level government positions." One quoted article notes that "The fact that other minorities were also disproportionately highly represented did not greatly matter [to anti-semites] - there was no tradition of anti-Latvianism in Russia, nor were Latvians found in the very top positions. Nor did it matter that Jews were equally strongly represented among other anti-Communist parties of the left". It seems to treat the term fairly and properly AFAI can see. <eleland/talkedits> 16:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable subject, although I support once suggest split between Jews and communism and Jewish Bolshevism. Please don't nominate multiplie articles for deletion in a single discussion; I have removed AfD tag from Zydokomuna; if you want to delete it create a separate discussion for it or gain consensus for merge on talk. PS. That said, as I suggested on talk of Zydokomuna article, it should probably be splits into Polish Jews and communism and Zydokomuna, and the conspiracy theory/slurr part could be merged into JB.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
    • See my remark below. `'Míkka 16:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. People, you are missing an improtant fact: the article The Jewish Bolshevism is an inadmissible fork by user:Ludvikus of the earlier created article Jewish Bolshevism. I tried to convince Ludvikus that keeping two copies of the same text is not allowed in wikipedia. I was met with extreme vitriolic animosity and accusations that I spread anti-Semtitsm. I left a request for "third opinion", but it was not ignored (I guess everyone is afraid to touch it with a long pole or simply does no care). I request again to join my attempts to remove the duplication of the text. `'Míkka 16:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Ouch, you are certainly right that JB and TJB needs to be merged / deforked. Isn't forking a clearly disruptive action? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
      • Fork? Fork you Mikka (just kidding). You're misrepresenting my position, which is simply this Jewish Bolshevism → The Jewish Bolshevism. Thereafter, I think that antisemitic explanation (the former article) that there is some merit to saying that Bolshevism is Jewish because "some" or "many" Jews happen to be Bolsheviks. Hey, I've met stupid Poles - but I would never say that being Polish means being Stupid!!! --Ludvikus 16:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
        • To Ludvikus: You have already been warned NOT to use obscenities and personal attacks! To repeat, kindly see: Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/The Protocols of Zion (imprints)#Do not use vulgarities: Kindly stop using obscenties/four letter words repeatedly. That is a clear violation of Wikipedia:Civility and the way you are addressing people here comes across as a violation of Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Take note. IZAK 17:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
          • You're charge is baseless, User IZAK. I expect you to know what "obscenities," "vulgarities," and "four letter words" are. Your reckless accusation that I do that is itself a violation of Wikipedia policy. Please retract you baseless charge that you have made here. Yours truly, --Ludvikus 05:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
            • Um Ludvikus: Can't you read your own words? You wrote the word "SHIT" at least twice at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/The Protocols of Zion (imprints)#Comments & Discussions: "There only are all the many different imprints of the same SHIT which too many people believe" and "I'm only interested in identifying the exact imprints of this antisemitic SHIT" and as far as I know the word shit is an obscenity. Then you used this language when talkng to another user at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jewish Bolshevism: "Fork? Fork you Mikka (just kidding). You're misrepresenting my position..." [1] (where you also use a vile ethnic slur: "Hey, I've met stupid Poles - but I would never say that being Polish means being Stupid!!!" [2]) and you seem to think it's funny to say "fork you" clearly intending "fuck you" (since you have to add the disclaimer "just kidding") since these are clear obscenities. No doubt there are many more cases like this 'cause I have just had the great pleasure of meeting you now as an editor. And let me tell you, you cannot fool me with either your claim to innocence (when you deny your own open obscenities) nor with your self-righteousness. Thanks, IZAK 12:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. I get dizzy just by looking at all these so called proposals. First, to delete the top article, than to merge another article into yet another article and finally to merge the merged article into a deleted article. Why don’t we just send the whole thing into Deep Space Nine instead and have Captain Janeway sort it out for us. I suggest you read the archived debate of an earlier bad nom at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Żydokomuna and than think about how difficult to reach is encyclopaedic impartiality among articles relating to history of Eastern Europe. Speaking of User:Ludvikus, I had to contend with his vulgar, repetitious attacks on me regarding yet another article on European affairs just recently.[3][4]. --Poeticbent talk 16:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. I would keep the main article, and reduce The Jewish Bolshevism to the following stub: "The Jewish Bolshevism, is the title of an antisemitic pamphlet, booklet, or tract (literature) published in London in 1922 and 1923 by the Britons Publishing Society with a forward by German Nazi, Alfred Rosenberg."Racepacket 20:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep & Merge per Racepacket. Stub The Jewish Bolshevism, and keep the other two, pending a merge discussion. Really, I don't think should have been an issue for AfD. Merges should be dealt with as such. --Bfigura (talk) 01:37, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and clean up, it all. M0RD00R 07:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletions. — Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  12:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, reduce to stub & Merge per Racepacket. —gorgan_almighty 14:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
  • For clarification, I think Zydokomuna is sufficiently different that it can remain a separate article, although I would defer to the WikiProject Poland.Racepacket 14:37, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Nominating multiple articles for deletion is not the way to discuss their merging.Biophys 22:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I became involved with this series of articles in response to a request for a Third opinion. It was my opinion that there are two distinct topics worthy of notability: (1) Bolsheviks who are ethnic Jews and (2) a notable pamphlet with the title "The Jewish Bolshevism ". The delineation between the articles might be muddy in the present form, but that is a reason to improve not delete. --Kevin Murray 00:06, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and clean up, as long as the cleanup is organized, efficient, and doesn't turn into an edit war like the one currently on the page. — HelloAnnyong [ t · c ] 04:17, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
  • merge and clean up. Yahel Guhan 05:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
  • keep and add more reliable source.The article is very important and contribute people knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oren.tal (talk • contribs) 15:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
  • keep used in political discourse --Molobo 20:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete POV fork. Bulldog123 22:40, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Two Reverse Merges: The Jewish Bolshevism ← Jewish Bolshevism & The Jewish Bolshevism ← Żydokomuna
  • All three items simply involve the antisemitic juxtaposition of Jewishness with Bolshevism, or with Communism, a close cognate of the latter; the Polish term (with the Z simply transliterates as "Jewish Communism"). There is no real political, or any other kind of "theory" (as scientists think of "theory"), except a conspiracy theory, which is really a cognate of "crackpot." So there is not much to say about it contentwise. That's the consequence of its being dubbed by scholars, and those who, as antisemitic. So what that leaves us with is reporting who used, or rather, abused, these expressions. "The Jewish Bolshevism" is a pamphlet which is apparently the only one which used theb term as a title and at the same time elaborated upon it as a topic or "theory" in the non-scientific, and certainly antisemitic, sense. I think therefor we need not dignify the notion by turning it, needlessly, into a Wikipedia Article. It is more than sufficient, as well as sensible, to use that pamphlet, issued by the most notorious antisemitic organization, dedicated to promoting and publicizing antisemitic propangand, The Britons. There is in that also appropriate poetic justice. Yours truly, --Ludvikus 00:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
    • I might as well add here the antisemitic argument all antisemites use with respect to rationalize (unsuccessfully, I might add, from the logical point of view) or support the above view: (1) Jews are more numerous than non-Jews percentage-wise (except in Israel) as subscribers to Bolshevism or Communism. (2) Ipso facto, Bolshevism and Communism are Jewish (whatever that means). Yours truly, --Ludvikus 00:50, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Accordingly, there is not much to write about except to name the antisemtic texts which embodied this view (and what better, or more appropriarte, text is there than The Jewish Bolshevism. The other thing that's to be done is to list or name the antisemites who subscribed to this fundamentally incoherent view: Alfred Rosenberg, Adolf Hitler, Henry Hamilton Beamish, etc. Yours truly (not me, by the way), --Ludvikus 00:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
    • There is a tendency, however, to engage here in improper original research. Some editors have consistently tried to write into at least one of these articles and explanation of Why "so many" (POV word, I always ask why not "so few?) were Communists. That's may be an interesting topic for political scientists. But it has no place in an article about an ethnic slur and political epithet. To do so is to act as if there were merit to the charge which needs defending. The situation is quite similar to that of the blood libel. One would not offer a dense. Rather, one argues that the charge is absurd. In a blood libel charge, would one need to show that the defendant was present on Easter Sunday in the home of a Christian family with many witnesses ready to attest thereto? Yours truly, --Ludvikus 01:11, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
  • keep and merge with Jewish Bolshevism & Żydokomuna and Redirect from the other name to the article.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Oren.tal (talk • contribs) 15:53, 20 October 2007
  • The three articles should be merged into one as they overlap, though it is unclear to me which article should be the main. --MPerel 05:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
  • speedy keep nominating articles for deletion should not be the way to get them merged.--יודל 13:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Jewish Bolshevism POV fork Avi 14:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete or Merge as per Piotrus. Bolshevism is typical Russian term, does not relate to communism or communists of different nationality or ethnicity, and is associated exclusively with something like the "Great October Revolution 1917", applies to Russian peasants and/or workers; Jewish were neither. Also, the Polish term Żydokomuna is not relevant here, it dealt with Polish or Russian communists of Jewish ancestry (mostly atheists), but those who became party members at later time, after the so called "Great Patriotic War" meaning WWII. The very appropriate example regarding Żydokomuna is the cleansing the party of Jewish communists by Władysław Gomułka in 1968 and enforcing them to emigrate to Israel. greg park avenue 16:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: these articles really shouldn't have been nominated for deletion all at once, as it makes achieving consensus on all of them extremely difficult. Since what is requested here is a merger, I'm not even sure AfD was the right place for it. But since it was brought here... my suggestion is to merge The Jewish Bolshevism into Jewish Bolshevism as an unnecessary fork, but keep Zydokomuna, since that article seems to be sufficiently different in its subject and content. Terraxos 17:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Well said. Although the argument that TJB is a notable publication - if "forked" with unnecessary content that should be merged back to JW leaving only publication related info in the article - is worth considering, too.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
      • True. Looking at it in more detail, I think The Jewish Bolshevism does contain enough notable encyclopedic material to exist as a page in its own right. However, it does duplicate some of the material from Jewish Bolshevism, so if it is kept that material should be merged back into its own page. Terraxos 00:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep This is an important chapter of Polish history and I do not see why it should be deleted. The purpose of a free encyclopedia is to describe everything significant. Tymek 23:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep & Merge per Racepacket. --SmokeyJoe 14:56, 25 October 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.