Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Racial views of Karl Marx


 * 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. Consensus is that much better and extensive sourcing would be needed to warrant a dedicated article about this subtopic. The one "keep" doesn't make any kind of argument.  Sandstein  06:00, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Racial views of Karl Marx

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Stand-alone article may not be warranted.

Per from WP:OBV, "...while it is agreed that George Washington is indeed notable, adding separate articles called "Childhood of George Washington", "Criticism of George Washington", and "Legacy of George Washington" without good cause could run afoul of Wikipedia's notability, neutrality, and content forking guidelines." -  Harsh  15:39, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -  Harsh  15:39, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. -  Harsh  15:39, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. -  Harsh  15:39, 23 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge. The topic may be notable (see eg. ). But I don't see a reason not to include this in the main article unless it becomes too big. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 19:33, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge any content worth keeping to Karl Marx and leave it as a redirect. Should it become a major object of study or a very fleshed-out article, it can be re-split. No need for a stand-alone article right now. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:00, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong objection to a merge proposed by Roscelese and Eddie891. What exactly do you want to merge? A full merge or a selective merge? Please keep in mind Karl Marx is already a GA. A full or even a selective merge would only sully the article. I am not denying that the source cited in the article originally isn't reliable, but there is nothing worth salvageable from the article. I'd like editors well-read on Marx to discuss the topic on their talk page, instead of shoehorning a selective and demonstrably poor interpretation from a single source into a GA. -  Harsh  21:10, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm a little unclear why you are reacting to this so 'harsh'ly [joke], but imo there's nothing wrong with selectively merging one sentence or so into Karl Marx. There's no reason a GA cannot be improved after passing, and I'm somewhat confused why a review that was conducted nine years ago by one (admittedly well-versed) editor is given so much weight. It's very odd to describe this as 'sullying' the article when the topic has been covered in at least one other journal-- suggesting that the content isn't something that should just be thrown away. I see little evidence this topic is 'demonstrably poor', and while the article isn't the greatest, WP:AFDISNTCLEANUP. Your suggestion that editors could discuss the content more on the talk page is a very good one, but that isn't the place of AfD. Best wishes, Eddie891 Talk Work 21:22, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Marx's views on race, is certainly a notable topic for a section on the main page and when that section grows large, into a separate article too. I am simply opining that there isn't anything worth merging from the proposed article as of currently. Just cherry picking one sentence over another, as you say, from the proposed article to be pasted to the main article, wouldn't be of any value nor would it give proper context. Sincere apologies if my tone was impudent. -  Harsh  21:47, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, that makes a lot of sense and looking again at the article I don't think there's anything worth merging. striking previous vote and changing to Delete as an unnecessary fork, nothing worth keeping. A redirect to the article doesn't make sense because it's not mentioned at Karl Marx currently. Eddie891 Talk Work 18:03, 25 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete I think the topic could be worth a mention on the main article, but I don't think frankly it should include this paragraph. We shouldn't have articles on people's views on a topic, except under very specific circumstances where a lot can be written about it and it would be too long to fit into the main article. Otherwise we will end up with 50 articles of Donald Trump's views on Abortion, Immigration, Healthcare etc. which would be confusing to navigate. AlessandroTiandelli333 (talk) 11:46, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Splitting out articles on the views of an individual like this needs lots of justification. That means multiple secondary sources that discuss the person's views in an indepth way. One source is not going to cut it. I am not even sure this level of sourcing justifies inclusion in the main article on Marx but it clearly does not justify creation a seperate article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:54, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep With my improvements, the article should stay in WP.
 * Delete - while a single paragraph might be added to the main article, a full article is WP:UNDUE. Bearian (talk) 16:57, 30 June 2020 (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.