Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neoconservatism in the People's Republic of China (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. Appears to be a referencing issue - the sources exist, but not in the article. Suggest incorporating them as soon as possible Fritzpoll (talk) 10:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Neoconservatism in the People's Republic of China
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Neologism: Term was used in a book by Joseph Fewsmith to refer to a current trend in Chinese thinking, but could find no other use in this context since 2003. Unrelated to general use of term. A Google search of the original Chinese word 新保守主义 found every article used the term to refer to American neo-conservatism. Neither Fewsmith nor his writings have own WP articles. The Four Deuces (talk) 16:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Cerejota (talk) 09:56, 23 February 2009 (UTC) WP:NOR takes precedence. --Litherlandsand (talk) 11:42, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The English language article provided as a source does not use the word "neoconservative." The topic seems to be notable enough but needs to be discussed under a different title. Northwestgnome (talk) 18:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete or userfy as original research. Unless sources are provided, I'm wary to say anything about the existence of a "neoconservative movement" in China; as far as I can tell, this is just one person's using political buzzwords to describe his/her personal impressions about the political climate there. r  ʨ  ana ɢ  talk/contribs 19:08, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment this article doesn't make sense. It argues that the movement wants reform... that doesn't sound like a conservation or a reversion to former practices. 76.66.193.90 (talk) 06:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Nominator failed to notify article's creator, as is customary and recommended in WP:AFD. As this editor is active, I suggest we do not close until we hear what s/he has to say.--
 * Comment Creator has now been notified. User_talk:Roadrunner  The Four Deuces (talk) 21:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to another wiki. If the creator wants his own wiki [without blatant advertising here], he should use http://www.yourwiki.net, and the content can be transferred under the GFDL. Original research can be good, but not here -
 * Weak Delete I would be happy to change if I see a Chinese Wiki Entry of this "theory," which I fail to locate any with RS. TheAsianGURU (talk) 21:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Strongly Keep - I'm the original creator on the topic. It's an obscure term in the West, but isn't certainly not OR or a neologism. Here is a scholarly discussion on the topic Roadrunner (talk) 07:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

CN&ei=Ge2kSdrzFpmatwfBqJHbBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=6&ct=result#PPA72,M1
 * http://www.aasianst.org/absts/1997abst/China/c117.htm
 * http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1525/as.2003.43.5.717,
 * http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~swlewis/syllabi/jwangsyl.html
 * http://www.ilib.cn/A-ISSN~1001-9952(2004)02-0097-10.html
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=PpRcDMl2Pu4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=conservative+thought+in+contemporary+china&ei=l-6kSa6SK5j4MJTpoYQO&hl=zh-CN#PPP7,M1
 * http://www.hum.leiden.edu/research/dongenevan.jsp
 * http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=JkvdVh2r7M3MQ62S0wkN1x4CpGvjhDXRxwML1kLnZNcb1zsbdngg!1382274848!-954900154?docId=95862431
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=IYoBhZK5rPwC&pg=PA70&lpg=PA70&dq=china+new+conservatism&source=bl&ots=wggFz2Kkx_&sig=Di4HQ0c0vZBjAMONNFRNDkwFM8c&hl=zh-

There are two entire books on the topic
 * http://www.amazon.com/Reverse-Course-Political-Neo-conservatism-Post-Tiananmen/dp/3639090322
 * http://www.amazon.com/Conservative-Thought-Contemporary-China-Peter/dp/0739120468

And entire papers on the topic
 * http://www.onderzoekinformatie.nl/en/oi/nod/onderzoek/OND1316090/
 * Order and Stability in Social Transition: Neoconservative Political Thought in Post-1989 China - see google scholar

And one popular article


 * http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/28/080728fa_fact_osnos

It is true that since 2004, the use of neoconservative has been overshadowed by the US use of the term, but that is why it's even more important to have an article on it. The other thing is that the term "neo-conservative" was popular in the 1990's to contrast with the "conservative Marxist-Leninist" ideology of Li Peng and Chen Yun, and but since the mid-2000's, you are more likely to see the movement labelled merely conservative.

Also, here are Chinese articles where the term is used


 * http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_44fb08f30100b9sb.html - A Neoconservative's Changing views toward Chinese governance
 * http://zhidao.baidu.com/question/16373913.html - What is the relationship between New Confucianism and Chinese Neo-Conservatism?
 * http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-HDXB200504015.htm - Tang Hao-ming's Historical Novel Writing in the Field of New Conservatism

One other thing to note is that if you do a Chinese google search on Neo-conservatism and get Donald Rumseld, you will invariably have the article refer to *American Neo-conservatism*. This is because the term "neo-conservative" in Chinese is already a known movement. Yes if you do the google search you get the American movement, but if you go into the deep pages and look at the scholarly literature, you start finding the Chinese movement.

Also the fact that I've been able to pull up about a dozen scholarly works and two entire books about a movement that no one else has heard of before, is precisely why there needs to be an article on it, and why it shouldn't be deleted. I'll volunteer to do a rewrite to include all of these links and update the article.

Can I convince people to change their votes?

Roadrunner (talk) 07:45, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Also you get a lot more Chinese hits if you exclude "meiguo" and then skip the first page. Here is more articles that clearly refer to the Chinese movement


 * http://www.cul-studies.com/community/shaoyanjun/200605/3917.html - Neoconservatism and Its Collective lack of Goalss
 * http://www.wyzxsx.com/Article/Class17/200712/28995.html - New Left and Conservatives - Allies or Enemies
 * http://cn.happycampus.com/docs/983404227901@hc03/25840 - Neoconservatism and Chinese culture

and another entire book in Chinese
 * http://www.lunwentianxia.com/product.sf.3687041.1/ - New Conservatism and 1990 s Literature

and New conservatism as a literary movement


 * http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/new_literary_history/v028/28.1chao.html - Post-Isms and Chinese New Conservatism

and someone has gotten a grant from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research to study the topic


 * http://www.onderzoekinformatie.nl/en/oi/nod/onderzoek/OND1305056/print

and a conference panel in 2001 on the topic


 * http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=events.event_summary&event_id=3744

I can go on all night and get you about a 100 more links. But I hope I've made my point.....


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.  -- Cerejota (talk) 10:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  -- Cerejota (talk) 10:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  -- Cerejota (talk) 10:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Comment The term 新保守主义 also translates as "New conservatism", which appears to be used in much of the literature, including many of the sources the author cites. My 1993 Webster's Dictionary defines neo-conservative as "(1955) : a former liberal espousing political conservatism". However the term did not become well used in English until recently. I would suggest the article be re-named "New Conservatism (People's Republic of China)" unless it can be shown that there is a consensus in calling them "neo-conservatives" in English. I agree with the author that the article needs more detail and also note that the the "New Conservatism" is not, as the article implies, a current political movement. The Four Deuces (talk) 18:59, 25 February 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.