Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neo-Stalinism


 * 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 per WP:SNOW. (non-admin) - Milk's   Favorite   Cookie  00:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Neo-Stalinism

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


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.   --  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined  /  C ) 23:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Article doesn't describe its own supposed topic, it just leaves a few lines of commentary, bit that are already covered elsewhere. No real definition of the term 'Neo-Stalinism' is presented. Soman (talk) 22:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I suppose the author considers the phrase to be self-evident. Anyway, here's a stack of sources. Colonel Warden (talk) 22:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment, I have a problem with 'self-evident' articles. Moreover, what would be a distinction between Stalinism and Neo-Stalinism? Stalinism is already a very ambigous topic, is there anything to the term 'Neo-Stalinism' except 'Stalinism that is (in any way) new'? --Soman (talk) 22:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The distinction is not limited to, but is along the lines of, acknowledging that Stalin-era policies and actions had negative effects, but still finding the positive things he did for Russia, in effect morally rehabilitating him. This falls short of advocating a return to those policies. --Dhartung | Talk 03:03, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment, two points: 1) There is no substantial material in article itself on this, 2) it seems the purpose of the article then would be way to portray the pov putin=stalin ? --Soman (talk) 07:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment And you get that from what, exactly? Putin is not even mentioned in the article. --Dhartung | Talk 08:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per the Colonel's stack of sources. The article could be improved and fleshed out more with recent developments in Russia. KnightLago (talk) 22:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Well, the term is used often scholastically, and after perusing some of the ghits, they're pretty reliable.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 02:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Well, I would guess that Stalinism is a continuation of the Stalinist tradition, where as Neo-Stalinism historically is trying to revive those ideas in a new context. I'm not an expert though.  But the subject is scholastically valid. matt91486 (talk) 04:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per the above listed sources. The definition is self-evident, although it could use with some fleshing out. Celarnor (talk) 15:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - per above.-Staberinde (talk) 16:43, 11 March 2008 (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.