Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Economics of fascism (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 08:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Economics of fascism


Delete. POV Content fork. All material in this article can and should already be discussed in other articles, like Italian Fascism, Fascism (Fascism and ideology), Corporatism, etc. Intangible 15:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Another attempt by Intangible to force a minority POV on the rest of Wikipedia.--Cberlet 15:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - The economic aspects of the subjects cited in the nom seem too long to include all the content of this article in those specific articles. There's an enormous amount of sources cited that deal with the specifics of economies and economic techniques in historic fascist societies. Might not be likable, but still important to study.  Unlike communism, fascism in itself is not an economic philosophy, but a method of governance, frequently characterized by an "iron fist" method of control of a populace using techniques such as blackshirts in order to gain population submission.  This article deals with historic (I hope it gets expanded to more current) economic policies under such a governance.  --Oakshade 16:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - The article needs a paragraph summary in the article Fascism and then a link to this article. The main article could use a few more subtopics broken out. Why would you take one concise article and try and distribute it over multiple articles: Italian Fascism, Fascism (Fascism and ideology), and Corporatism. Isn't that a step backward? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Because it is unclear if this article is about the economics of generic fascism or economics of Fascist Italy / Nazi Germany. If it is about the latter, the article should be split. If it is about the former, the article should be split as well, because generic fascism is discussed in Fascism and Corporatism. Intangible 09:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Encyclopedic topic and has references. Edison 19:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as a perfectly acceptable encyclopedia article. Simply because a political system is unpopular does not mean that its description in an encyclopedia must be held hostage to leftist/liberal bigotry. The Crying Orc 09:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Please keep this article! It has an excellent start. If it needs some cleanup the author can probably do so, or link it to other topical articles. This needs to be seperate so as not to require a prolonged hunt through the expansive articles on Fascism for the economics aspects thereof. If you put too much into an Article (Like Fascism) it can become too unwieldly and too broad in scope. Please at least keep the article on file somewhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.224.105.69 (talk • contribs)
 * Comment. I agree there is valuable information in this article that needs to be preserverd. However, the problem with this article lies in its mixing of generic fascism with that of the (fascist) economic policies of Fascist Italy or Nazi Germany. This mixing makes it hard to improve this article at all! It would be better to separate this stuff in say Economic policies of Fascist Italy or Economic policies of Nazi Germany. Intangible 13:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - corporatism is a key concept in almost all varieties of fascism. Pete Fenelon 01:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree with Richard Arthur Norton that this is an appropriate situation for a summary in the main article (Fascism) with more detail available in this daughter article. JamesMLane t c 01:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep  Buck  ets  ofg  20:35, 25 November 2006 (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.