Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whataboutism: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m spelling |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:({{Find sources AFD|Whataboutism}}) |
:({{Find sources AFD|Whataboutism}}) |
||
[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary#Neologisms|Article on non-notable neologism that appears to be created in an attempt to use Wikipedia to increase usage of the term]]. The term itself was made up by The Economist journalist in 2006 and have barely been used ever since. As google search and google trends indicate some usage of the neologism begun in 2014 way after creation of this article. I myself discovered this article when it was linked in political discussion where one of the sides was accused of "whataboutism". It describes [[Tu quoque]] fallacy, neutral article for which already exists. The difference with this article is that this one has heavy anti-Russian bias and inherently non-NPOV. [[User:Niyaro|Niyaro]] ([[User talk:Niyaro|talk]]) 04:19, 13 October 2015 (UTC) |
[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary#Neologisms|Article on non-notable neologism that appears to be created in an attempt to use Wikipedia to increase usage of the term]]. The term itself was made up by The Economist journalist in 2006 and have barely been used ever since. As google search and google trends indicate some usage of the neologism begun in 2014 way after creation of this article. I myself discovered this article when it was linked in political discussion where one of the sides was accused of "whataboutism". It describes [[Tu quoque]] fallacy, neutral article for which already exists. The difference with this article is that this one has heavy anti-Russian bias and inherently non-NPOV. [[User:Niyaro|Niyaro]] ([[User talk:Niyaro|talk]]) 04:19, 13 October 2015 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep'''. First this is a suspicious [[WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT]] nomination by a suspicious account with just a few edits (some of them several years old). Second, article is fairly well sourced and there's plenty evidence for its notability. The term is frequently used in media and also in academic work [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=whataboutism&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C4&as_sdtp=]. The article on the [[tu quoque]] is about the fallacy in general, this is about a particular manifestation. Hence the scope is different. There's nothing "anti-Russian" about this article and this assertion really just reveals the [[WP:BATTLEGROUND]] mentality of the nominator. Neither is the article non-NPOV.<span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Volunteer Marek|<font style="color:orange;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">''' Volunteer Marek '''</font>]]</span> 05:10, 13 October 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 05:10, 13 October 2015
Whataboutism
- Whataboutism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article on non-notable neologism that appears to be created in an attempt to use Wikipedia to increase usage of the term. The term itself was made up by The Economist journalist in 2006 and have barely been used ever since. As google search and google trends indicate some usage of the neologism begun in 2014 way after creation of this article. I myself discovered this article when it was linked in political discussion where one of the sides was accused of "whataboutism". It describes Tu quoque fallacy, neutral article for which already exists. The difference with this article is that this one has heavy anti-Russian bias and inherently non-NPOV. Niyaro (talk) 04:19, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. First this is a suspicious WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT nomination by a suspicious account with just a few edits (some of them several years old). Second, article is fairly well sourced and there's plenty evidence for its notability. The term is frequently used in media and also in academic work [1]. The article on the tu quoque is about the fallacy in general, this is about a particular manifestation. Hence the scope is different. There's nothing "anti-Russian" about this article and this assertion really just reveals the WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality of the nominator. Neither is the article non-NPOV. Volunteer Marek 05:10, 13 October 2015 (UTC)