Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis


 * 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   redirect to Eurabia. Usable content may be merged from the page history. T. Canens (talk) 10:11, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No indication of notability per WP:N. Cs32en  Talk to me  12:22, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. I was honestly expecting to have to vote "keep" on this on the basis of JSTOR reviews, but there actually aren't any. Couple of reviews, mostly in right-wing publications - not enough to attest notability. The title's been in the news recently because Ye'or's writing inspired the recent terrorism in Norway, but these are trivial mentions; the reviews in reliable sources that would be necessary in order to keep the article are lacking. Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 18:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 15:04, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep . It might not have genuine academic journal reviews, but it was reviewed in the London Review of Books, and apparently it coined the term Eurabia, which was picked up by others. It was also cited multiple times in NYT (click news link above) in 2005. FuFoFuEd (talk) 22:55, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It did not coin the term, as, according to the article Eurabia, Ye'or herself says. It may be possible that she was the first to use the term with this meaning. Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 23:15, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, she appropriated it see (review in Middle East Quarterly). Speaking of which, that source claims to be peer-reviewed, but given the glowing reviews all of Ye'or's books get there, it's a highly biased pool of reviewers, I suspect. By the way Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide doesn't have much more sources than this one, so you should nominate that one as well if you think reviews for this one are insufficient. FuFoFuEd (talk) 23:27, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * As a side note, I don't consider the LRB source to be significant coverage. It contains only two paragraphs on the book - the first is a lengthy blockquote from the book, and the second just repeats the endorsements on the book jacket. No actual commentary from the article's author on the book. Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 23:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * If you think the rest of the paragraphs are not a subtle disparagement of this book (as a conspiracy theory itself), you didn't read the review carefully enough. FuFoFuEd (talk) 23:31, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * We'll have to differ on that one. (At least your source names the book - I've had one user claim a piece was a "review" of a similar book when it never even mentioned the title!) Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 23:41, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Luckily the Financial Times was far more blunt. It doesn't take deep analytical skills to parse "Eurabia has been described as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in reverse". FuFoFuEd (talk) 02:45, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Also reviewed in, Mediterranean Quarterly, 2 pages. FuFoFuEd (talk) 23:34, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Seems to meet WP:NBOOK because of multiple reviews. More here: . Christopher Connor (talk) 01:21, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I change my vote to smerge and redirect to Eurabia. It's somewhat notable for what it has started, but two articles on essentially the same topic are not justified by the amount of references addressing this book in particular. FuFoFuEd (talk) 07:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge to Eurabia per FuFoFuEd. I'm not convinced a redirect is called for, but since redirects are cheap, why not.   Rich wales (talk · contribs) 02:35, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep it seems to me that is most useful distinguish between what Bat Ye'or writes in her book and the general use of the term "Eurabia". Anyway how we could link Bat Ye'or with YouTube's video "Muslim Demographics" or Muammar al-Gaddafi's speech or Ayaan Hirsi Ali's position? Even Mat Carr admits "Eurabia" had moved from  "an outlandish conspiracy theory" to a more mainstream and "dangerous Islamophobic fantasy". This last fantasy should be separate by Bat Ye'or's book. I don't know if this is the place to discuss this but I would return to the topic of the coinage of the term "Eurabia". I would note that the quoted Mat Carr (extensivly quoted in order to criticize Bat Ye'or) writes "The term was originally coined by the British-Swiss historian Bat Ye’or."..And please note the term "historian" used by Carr. About the notability question Bat Ye'or exposes her theory in the entry "euro-arab anti-semitism" in the Encyclopedia of the Jewish diaspora: origins, experiences, and culture, Volume 1, p. 115.. History professor Seth Armus writes: "there are certainly worse books on the subject than Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, by Bat Ye'or, and her sistematic analysis deserves serious attention. It is not her fault that her thesis has been widely embraced by thoughtless polemicists" (French anti-Americanism (1930-1948): critical moments in a complex history, p. 167). --Domics (talk) 08:38, 11 August 2011 (UTC) and Israel W. Charny,  psychologist and historian, even if in disagreement with Bat Ye'or writes that she is "a world-renowed scholar of Islam" and that she "has been published extensively and respectufully by important academic presses and who is invited to lecture at responsible and conservative academic centers".(Charny, "Fighting suicide bombing: a worldwide campaign for life", p. 34).--Domics (talk) 07:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Certainly passes notability. --Gelobet sei (talk) 11:28, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect into Eurabia - one thing is being known or perhaps more appropriately, "notorious", and another is being notable. Since the article on Eurabia is about the same usage, and this book is indeed considered to be the first said usage in a book, it belongs there, since there is no independent notability for the book, all of its notability is linked to the notability of the term itself, of which the book had much less to do than the blogs on the internet.--Cerejota (talk) 06:23, 14 August 2011 (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.