Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Not Every Country Is The United States


 * 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   delete. JForget 01:30, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Not Every Country Is The United States

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

Original research. The article has currently five sources, none of which mention the subject of the article (ie. the expression "Not every country is the United States"). The expression gets three Google hits, one of which is a Wikipedia mirror, plus two more for "not every country is the US". Nothing in News, Scholar and Books searches. If there are reliable sources that discuss this expression in detail, I sure don't know how to find them. Jafeluv (talk) 07:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Support and G7. This is more of a little essay and joke I wrote, and does not belong in mainspace. As the author of the article I support its removal. SimonTrew (talk) 08:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * BTW it is in Bill Bryson's "Notes From A Big Country" (UK)/ "I'm A Stranger Here Myself" (US). But it is still, I think, inappropriate for article space. SimonTrew (talk)


 * Neutral. Having re-read the article, it seems not too badly written and the sources ARE valid (for passports etc). I was probably in too much of a hurry to say, yeah, delete. I am still not sure it belongs in article space but perhaps better to move it to a WP essay or something instead of just deleting? I can ref the Bryson book (I only have US version here but no doubt amazon search will get me the UK version) but since it was wikilinked and quite clearly stated the source of the quote I did not see the need for a separate ref for it, you only have to click the link. I know others think each article should stand on its own feet (and I had a big hand in writing the essay at WP:OWNFEET so can hardly complain) but also I worry sometimes that overlinking references on multiple articles makes it harder to maintain. SimonTrew (talk) 09:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Essentially a violation of WP:OR. —SlamDiego&#8592;T 12:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, agree with nomination. If I'm elected, every country will be. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:20, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as a non-notable phrase. Contributions to Americocentrism cheerfully accepted, preferably in American dollars. No Euros or Canadian/Australian/British "dollars" please, kindly convert these at your national bank.  Thank you.  Mandsford (talk) 17:24, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable phrase, and some WP:OR. This could also invite a hundred other articles deriding the beliefs by inhabitants of other countries that the way they hold a knife and fork, or their pronunciations, or the way they treat women, or the way they worship or don't worship a god, are the correct or at least the best ones. Each country's beer, barbecue or baklava is far better than the poor imitations from other countries. Edison (talk) 17:37, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete foolish junk; neologism. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 21:44, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Clearly an essay -- move to essay space or userspace. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 17:52, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh just let it go SPEEDY. It is not my neologism! At least User:Edison's comment was sensible. To me, the others simply reinforce the very point the article was trying to make. It does not belong in article namespace I perfectly agree with that, but it doesn't mean that it should die for not being sourced. I found sources for UK passport ownership (I hope you accept the formal record of the UK government is a reliable source?) for Canada and US passport ownership. There is some OR in there in the phrasing but nothing that cannot be worked on to scrub it up. I referenced the book and the quote, the proposer kindly wrote on my talk page to ask what and initially I said yeah I support it. I changed my mind and said neutral, hoping maybe it should move to essay space or whatever. But if the mood of others is to delete it, then let it go quickly. SimonTrew (talk) 21:58, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply: Read WP:SYNTH (a subsection of WP:OR). Your claim that others are somehow proving your point shows a decided failure to understand others on your part. —SlamDiego&#8592;T 23:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Move to essay space. This would make a fine Wikipedia essay, in keeping with WikiProject Countering systemic bias, but not an article. The phrase "Not every country is America" gets nearly a quarter of a million hits in Google, but only one in a book, and none in News or Scholar. Fences  &amp;  Windows  23:10, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete or Move to essay space. What worries me about this article is that the author created it as a joke and as "a gentle nudge to some people who write US-centric articles". You're an editor with around six and a half thousand edits, and yet you created this article in the mainspace? Anyone who has done so many edits I would have thought would want to improve Wikipedia's reputation and not just add crap like this to it. Alan16 (talk) 00:09, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Perhaps this is a manifestation of the evident belief of some editors that the ordinary principles do not apply when one wishes to complain about Americans. —SlamDiego&#8592;T 00:57, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 'Comment I lived and worked in the US for two years and found everyone I met nothing but charming, helpfull and friendly. I also work for a US-based company, based in San Diego, and have to write in US English (as best I can). When I said I wrote it as a joke I did not mean entirely that, but that it was meant light-heartedly not to whack americans on the head. I can't believe this is causing this much fuss when the proposer politely asked in my user talk, I supported him, then changed my mind to neutral thinking perhaps it should move to essay space. SimonTrew (talk) 01:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply: It doesn't belong in essay space either. America is not a peculiarly ignorant or insular nation, and thus not in peculiar need for reminder not to act in an insular or ignorant manner.  Unless there are going to be about 140 other essays, for the other nations, this essay belongs where sun does not shine.  What we really need is an essay that says No nation or nationality is fair game. —SlamDiego&#8592;T 03:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * But that rather weakens the point. The fact is that I checked up on the statistics for the proportions of North Americans against the UK whow own passports. Yes I could add other English-speaking countries if relevant. The phrase is there, I referenced the book. Your tone seems somewhat unnecessarily hostile, to me, as if you think I am an anti-american. While I agree with you that it should be "every country has its own views" or whatever that would water it down to be just stating the bleeding obvious. The point is that I have given stats that show that fewer than one in five Americans have ever had a passport. Either dispute that fact or accept it. The other comments in this room I can quite happily take at face value but I am feeling you just have a personal grudge now. Did I ever say all americans are ignorant? The closes I came is to say that they may not be aware of other cultures. That is not the same thing. SimonTrew (talk) 12:23, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


 * To qualify, I have not referenced the book in the article. I have the reference ready to put in the article but did not want to touch the article while this discussion is going on, that is not fair on anyone. SimonTrew (talk) 12:25, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Has anyone asked that this be kept? All I see is delete !votes and one neutral, including a frank admission that this was a light-hearted essay of some sort.  I get it, we all need to be more open-minded, let's close the discussion. Mandsford (talk) 12:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete and Merge: Possible destinations for merging are: Americentrism and American exceptionalism Seb az86556 (talk) 15:55, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see Merge and delete. We're not allowed to delete and merge content - mergers should always leave a redirect behind that preserves the edit history of the merged content. Jafeluv (talk) 19:13, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Regardless of the exact route, I think the best thing is to delete it but before it is done I move it to my user space and then see if there is any useful content of the article I can add into one of other of those. Thanks for being constructive. SimonTrew (talk) 12:30, 8 August 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.