Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pro-war Left (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   no consensus. One two three... 20:25, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Pro-war Left
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article is essentially entirely original research. While I don't deny that some left-wingers supported the Iraq war, and some people have used the phrases 'pro-war left' or 'decent left' to describe them (e.g. this opinion piece:), there isn't any specific group or individual that identifies itself as such. As a result, virtually every statement in this article is unsourced and arguably unsourcable. Describing any specific person as being a member of the 'pro-war left' is arguably not neutral, if not an outright WP:BLP violation, since no one actually calls themselves 'pro-war'. (Compare this article with Liberal hawk, which is not brilliantly sourced but at least contains plenty of statements that could be.) Robofish (talk) 22:07, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I see that this article was previously nominated for deletion, and the previous discussion linked to a number of sources discussing the concept of the 'pro-war left'. While it may therefore pass the notability guideline, I'm still not convinced that a neutral, properly sourced article could actually be written on the topic. Robofish (talk) 22:12, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:48, 9 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Euston manifesto? Maybe. Norman Geras? Perhaps. And of course there's the clearly notable, slam dunk Social-patriotism. But this topic is amorphous. Carrite (talk) 03:21, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article does not claim that the Pro-War Left is any particular identifiable group of individuals, or that they have any unifying or distinguishing beliefs. The article does not provide evidence of significant coverage in reliable source.  Searches obviously turn up many results for "pro-war left" but none of them support the concept of them being an identifiable group within British politics capable of founding an encyclopaedic article. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:45, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep but rewwrite. Alternatively merge with the Euston manifesto.  A real and notable phenomena and an identifiable group.  JASpencer (talk) 06:45, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic is notable - see The Left at War, for another example. The rest is a matter of ordinary editing per our editing policy and AFD is not cleanup. Warden (talk) 09:32, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - It's a bunch of OR, not an article about an actual distinct identifiable group of individuals.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:05, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The people who supported the Euston manifesto were very clearly defined because they signed it. Compare with Leftists, say, which covers a huge spectrum of people with quite fuzzy boundaries.  That's a blue link, not a red one. Warden (talk) 20:33, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The problem with linking the Euston manifesto here is that it wasn't specifically pro-war, nor specifically left-wing; insofar as it did express political views, they were all pretty vague. As such, it's a bit dubious to say anyone who signed it should be considered part of the 'pro-war left', although doubtless some commentators have made that characterisation. Robofish (talk) 18:13, 12 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as OR. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:36, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Current article has multiple issues, including OR, but the topic is notable. Could not be merged to Euston Manifesto, as that was not specifically "pro-war". Note, WP articles are not just about proper noun things like Euston Manifesto, but also has articles on, e.g. far left, ultra-left, soft left, liberal hawk, neoconservative, etc.BobFromBrockley (talk) 17:31, 15 November 2011 (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.