Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:31, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Original research. Surely fantasy anti-Japan propaganda designed to crapflood the internet via scrubbers Oncebyten (talk) 06:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC) — Oncebyten (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep I don't see how this is propaganda, perhaps biased but not propganda. The article has been around for four years and has a good number of reliable references.  Granted its a start class and needs work, but I don't see good reason to delete it.  Also it doesn't appear that the merge proposals have been given very much discussion; that should have been tried long before it came to AfD.  -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 11:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The solution for propaganda would be editing, not deletion. Fg2 (talk) 01:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.  —Fg2 (talk) 01:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The article lists a large number of references, though they need to be cited in-line. The nominator not only has made no attempt to improve this article, nominating it for deletion are their only edits. Edward321 (talk)
 * Speedy delete There is no such thing as "Militarism-Socialism". There is not one scholarly paper on "Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan". There are no internet resources on "Militarism-Socialism in Showa Japan" except for copies of this page. None of the references mention "Militarism-Socialism". There is no topic on right-socialim or militarism-socialism in the Encyclopedia Britannica. 118.0.145.32 (talk) 08:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC) — 118.0.145.32 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Perhaps the title is incorrect but the content is correct? -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 09:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * As Kraftlos asks -- is this simply a misnamed article or is the content twisting the sources? —Quasirandom (talk) 14:24, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin: Please see this sockpuppet investigation. Thanks, Tiptoety  talk 00:03, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * And please also note that it was Edward321 that put in the investigation to rig this vote their way. Look at the content and concept folks. Thanks. --118.0.145.32 (talk) 00:11, 4 March 2009 (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.