Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kakistocracy (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. Liz Read! Talk! 03:16, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Kakistocracy
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:DICDEF. While the article contains several sources, none of them provide substantial coverage of Kakistocracy itself and I can’t find evidence that it’s anything more than novel way to say the government is a pack of thieves and liars. RaiderAspect (talk) 00:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. RaiderAspect (talk) 00:19, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - Not a lot of in depth discussion, but there is certainly RS here to indicate the term is being used, and enoough context and usage indicate what its about. Deathlibrarian (talk) 02:35, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, passes WP:GNG, based on being the subject of many reliable, independent, secondary sources.

SailingInABathTub (talk) 11:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't believe that any of the sources meet the substantial coverage requirement that GNG and DICDEF require. To quote from WP:DICDEF: such articles must go beyond what would be found in a dictionary entry (definition, pronunciation, etymology, use information, etc.), and include information on the social or historical significance of the term. These sources all use the term Kakistocracy, explain its definition, and sometimes include some of its etymology - but they swiftly move on to their real subject, the political culture of various nations/governments. --RaiderAspect (talk) 15:11, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * ... so, the social and historical significance of the term then. SailingInABathTub (talk) 15:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   07:37, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete — I agree with the comment above. Unlike e.g. kleptocracy, for which there is serious academic analysis of the term of what makes a regime kleptocratic, that is not true of kakistocracy, which is for all intents and purposes just a fancier way of saying idiocracy (a term that inspired a whole movie, but is still not notable as a political science term in itself). The "scope and use" of the term is very simple: it's bad government by idiots. It does not entail some broader reference to how the government functions, like kleptocracy, or its mode of decisionmaking, etc. There's not a whole lot else that can be said about it. WhinyTheYounger (WtY) (talk, contribs)  19:05, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Adding a caveat to the above that there does appear to be a novel attempt to define kakistocracy systematically à la kleptocracy etc. in Abadjian 2010, a journal article by an independent researcher. The definition offered does not seem to have been replicated or examined elsewhere. WhinyTheYounger (WtY) (talk, contribs)  17:37, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep The sources describe this beyond just a definition and there is adequate content and context here for notability. Open to a merge target, but deletion isn't warranted here. Reywas92Talk 14:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I think there's enough to go on here that the "just a dictionary definition" concern, while understandable, isn't fatal. Whatever ails the page, deletion doesn't seem like the right fix. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 21:55, 1 February 2022 (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.