Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neo Communism

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 of the debate was no consensus. Mailer Diablo 01:22, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neo Communism

This afd nomination was incomplete. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 14:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable, real phenomenon, and judging by Google this is the most common usage of the term. Just a very poor article at present. --Bth 15:54, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It is a meaningless word. It is not a phenomenon nor a political concept. At best it is a nice-sounding buzzword. --Ezeu 16:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rework, acknowledging that the term is generally used by opponents of this position; links to alleged neo-communists, such as Zhirinovksy, would be a good idea. Alba 17:07, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not wiktionary. Whether this is the most common usage of the term is highly disputable. Rather its a generic term, used in political discussions to refer to any form of communism or marxist thought that for some reason gets the prefix 'neo'. --Soman 18:59, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This claim that it's not the common usage smacks to me of systemic bias from members of the Anglophone non-Stalinist Left. It's quite clear that the word is commonly and widely used to refer to what's left of the former "Communist" parties in the former USSR and Warsaw Pact. For instance see[1], [2], [3], [4] all from the first page of hits Google gave me for "neocommunist" and all using it that way. Compare against one guy with a blog from Canada (don't click that link, it's popup hell) calling himself "neocommunist" in another sense. I'm well aware of the pitfalls of using Google as an ultimate barometer but in this case it seems indicative. --Bth 19:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep. seems to be a valid term. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 01:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
in mother Russia, article keeps you!. (sorry, I just couldn't resist). In use throughout the world. --Midnighttonight 02:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per Ezeu. Certainly not known in the Czech Republic, btw. Pavel Vozenilek 14:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per WP:WINAD. Stifle 00:46, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!
Ezeu 20:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It is a real ideology and an important phenomenon in some parts of the world. Bucketsofg 20:32, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per Ezeu. Google shows that it is used by websites like frontpagemag and freerepublic to describe just about anyone to their left, and in an Eastern European context it is just as ill-defined; the politician mentioned as an example in the article, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, is in fact normally called an ultranationalist and a right-wing extremist. David Sneek 20:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless it can be rewritten into something substantive. Nobody claims that Zhirinovsky is a communist of any sort. Original author may have been confused with Neo-Marxism or Eurocommunism (terms often synonymous with Neo-Communism). --metzerly 08:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: It might also be added that Zhirinovsky just recently declared that he supportes the motion condemning communism in PACE. --Soman 10:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.