Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Organic centralism


 * 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 no consensus. Tending keep.  Sandstein  08:24, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Organic centralism

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet notability guidelines, overly technical and unclear subject, can be merged into left communism or another communism article. Pariah24 ┃ ☏ 22:02, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep:
 * Notability: Article content does not determine notability Yes, maybe the article should be improved, but that does not affect its notability. The Communist Party of Italy had 43,000 members in 1924 and was lead by Bordiga. Organic centralism was one of the key concepts Bordiga used against "Bolshevisation" . They lost control of the Party at the Lyons conference largely through political manoeuvre by Gramsci and political repression by the Fascists. So I think that its notability has been clearly established. It should not be merged into Left Communism as it is has a distinct nature, particularly relevant to the political evolution in Italy, rather than to left communism. HOwever its presence in the Left Communism sidebar should be retained. It should no more be merged into communism than the article on democratic centralism.Leutha (talk) 04:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:58, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:58, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Not a familiar topic to most of us, but that's perhaps our ethnocentrism. Unfamiliar ≠ unimportant.  DGG ( talk ) 07:42, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep has potential. Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  04:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:03, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * delete - no evidence it is anything but an occasional epithet attached to "centralism" rather than a separate doctrine. Staszek Lem (talk) 02:15, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep -seems to be historically significant as a distinct ideology per references and Leutha's arguments above. As a reader, I'd rather see a brief mention in the Communism article that links to this one than have to digest all this text on the  Communism page ABF99 (talk) 03:01, 11 October 2016 (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.