Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reactionary modernism


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 06:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Reactionary modernism

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

neologism invented by one guy and not widely used. gnews mainly refers to his book. LibStar (talk) 07:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. There are copious sources referring to the neologism, which is actually an influential concept, a quick search turned up many references to it, many recent ones. It's widely recognized among academic historians, not obscure at all, and widely used in cultural analyses of the Weimar Republic and European society during the interwar period. I added some more info and sources to the article, maybe the connection with 1920s/30s history will be clearer. I also added a couple of WikiProject banners to the Talk page of this article, it's an article related to Fascism as a topic and also (European) culture.OttawaAC (talk) 02:35, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. For reasons stated above. --Loremaster (talk) 16:20, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:JUSTAVOTE. LibStar (talk) 04:07, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 15:01, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 15:02, 30 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, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. I see no reason for this article to be deleted. It certainly needs to be cleaned up and formatted, but the topic is certainly notable with a variety of reliable sources. -- NINTENDUDE 64 01:32, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - the original neologism has long since been taken up and used by many authors as demonstrated by the citations. Ample RS to prove notability. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:45, 6 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.