Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Perestroika Movement (political science)


 * 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 with no one other than the nominator proposing deletion. Participants or other editors are free to initialise a discussion on a merger with an appropriate article if so desired. This has had only one proper relisting so might otherwise been relisted again. However, it has been up on AFD for over a month due to the error in transclusion so it's time to close this discussion. (non-admin closure) KTC (talk) 08:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Perestroika Movement (political science)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Does not meet notability criteria. There is no such *defined* movement, just a general trend towards methodological pluralism, which is already covert in this article. This fork is nothing but trivia and the (self?)promotion of some selective publications. Mootros (talk) 06:57, 25 May 2012 (UTC) Mootros (talk) 06:57, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:53, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:54, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge with Perestroika, if there is anything worth saving. Else, Redirect to Perestroika.  Agree that it's a fork, at best. Roodog2k (talk) 17:25, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, didn't you mean to say merge/redirect with methodological pluralism? Mootros (talk) 02:42, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → B  music  ian  02:03, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Merge - Merge fork. Target choice to closer, but merge/redirect with methodological pluralism seems reasonable. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 06:38, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted previous relisting placed transcluded discussion in the June 1 2011 deletion log, procedural relisting to current year.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Monty  845  21:36, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - This has got nothing to do whatsoever with perestroika. Sources showing in the footnotes are sufficient for this topic to pass GNG. I have tried to render the lead into English, so y'all might want to take a look at it again. Severe problems remain with the body of the piece, but that is an editing matter, not a notability matter. Carrite (talk) 03:59, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak keep I'm the furthest thing from an expert in the field, but I do see reliable sources. It does appear to be notable within the scope of Political Science, just not sure how notable... Roodog2k (talk) 15:12, 26 June 2012 (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.