Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Revolutionary Socialist Democracy


 * 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 of the debate was delete. W.marsh 02:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Revolutionary Socialist Democracy
The AfD tag was put on this page by User:Thecrisis5 but this user did not complete the AfD process. This article seems notable enough to me, but for now I'll abstain from voting. --Danielrocks123 02:24, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Reads like a manifesto. Historical significance not established. 7 Gits, all in small letters. ~ trialsanderrors 02:27, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Possible reason for the Google failure is that article was renamed by the nominator before slapping the AfD tag on it. Article title was Revolutionary Socialism, which gets 88K hits. Fan1967 02:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * This does not change While a Revolutionary Socialist Party has yet to be made WP:NOT a crystal ball, next to WP:POV, WP:OR. Btw, User:Thecrisis5 was the original editor of the article and also tried to blank it three times. ~ trialsanderrors 02:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep, someone obviously spent some time on this. Perhaps merge into Marxism or similar. It's not bad as an article, but the movement is not historically significant (and I found no articles which link to it). TrianaC 02:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * EDIT: just read Fan1967's comment. Rename as before, then, I guess. Is this a sneaky move on the part of the AfD nominator for Wikirecognition? :p TrianaC 02:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep under the name "Revolutionary Socialism" and tag boldly for clean up. As written, seems to be a lot of unreference crystal ball work and original research, but Britannica calls it a type of socialism, and Google shows a lot of people talking about it, so I think there has to be a pony in here somewhere. --William Pietri 04:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. If the author wants it deleted for a fresh start, who am I to argue? --William Pietri 07:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Original research. Homey 04:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Given that (a) all the names mentioned are well-known figures of other branches of socialism, (b) the flag in the article is the Red Army flag, and (c) all external links and references are to well-known organisations and works within the socialist circle, I suspect it's a hoax. Moreover, only 11 google hits on "Revolutionary Socialist Democracy" most of which have simply the wrong context, it's absolutely non-notable. -- Koffieyahoo 05:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Besides, Revolutionary socialism usually refers the branch of socialism that wants to overthow the govenment replacing it by a socialist one. This is a much older phenomenon than what the acticle is supposed to be talking about with as its prime example the Russian Revolution. To link to the competition. -- Koffieyahoo 05:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Heads up Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-06-21_Revolutionary_Socialism -- Koffieyahoo 05:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Hey guys, sorry about the mishap involving the two names being switched. Youll have to forgive me, im relativly new to wikipedia. I want this article deleted, i am the author. And as i did put a lot of time into it, i want to restart and heed some of the concerns you and others have voiced. It has no historical significance if your concered about that, its a new idea, hence no history. But im ok with you guys deleting it, i need to tweak it, and ill remake the article under a new title soon. --Zhukov 05:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I do not think that'll solve the notability problem. Notability comes with relevant, non-generic references, and those haven't been provided up until now, as can be witnessed on the Talk:Revolutionary_Socialism page. -- Koffieyahoo 05:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Another comment - if it is deleted, it will stay deleted (or be speedy deleted) unless a very good reason why the claims of notability is invalid is made. Ian ¹³  /t  09:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment I was misusing the name "Revolutionary Socialism". But i can make a historical anylysis of revolutionary socialism, youll just have to give me time, or anyone else can do it for that matter. It should be mentioned on wikipedia somewhere though. The only existing article is a fairly well written one on the Socialist-Revolutionary Party of pre soviet russia. I have a few notible refrences on that party in paticular, so ill help anyone who wants to re write the article. --Zhukov 06:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong, speedy, maximal delete with exteme prejudice. This is just a bunch of original research that looks like a college paper.  There's no claim that any particular party, organization, or facton is particularly associated with this concept, or that any particular major thinker has used it.  The word itself initially makes me think of Rosa Luxemburg, whom I really quite admire theoretically... but the description of what it means is a vague grocery list of Marxists or near-Marxists, who have many subtantial political and theorectical disagreements among them.  Just saying, "well, if you take the best of all these thinkers, you'd get something really good" isn't an article.  LotLE × talk  06:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:NOR. --Coredesat 07:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Very Strong Keep A notable, well written, profesional looking, refrenced article about a worthy topic. Tobyk777 08:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * You can't be serious. Have you read it at all? Where are the references then? Qwertyus 08:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Qwertyus 08:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Koffieyahoo. Ian ¹³  /t  09:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Koffieyahoo. Looks pretty dubious, although I wouldn't sow the ground with salt like Lulu otLE :) Paddles TC 10:12, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I think an article on Revolutionary socialism is needed - though it's something of a cluster concept rather than the particular ideology which this article seems to think it is. "Revolutionary socialists" aren't necessarily Communists so a separate article would make sense, one that refers both to historical revolutionary socialism (out of which developed Marxism and Marxist-Leninism) and modern use of the phrase "revolutionary socialism" which is generally used to differentiate oneself from parliamentary socialists/social democrats, is a phrase also used by Trotskyists, Stalinists and other variety of Communists as well as those who reject Leninism or Marxism and isn't a set ideology. However, this article is called "Revolutionary Socialist Democracy" so I don't see the point of keeping and rewriting.Homey 13:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree with homey, its needed, but as i am working on the soviet project i dont have time do rewrite it or make another. So if anyone else is up to reasearching and re writing the article in question then go for it. Zhukov 15:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete but we do really need an article on Revolutionary Socialism (e.g. here) as an important strand of socialist thought to contrast with Democratic Socialism. --Coroebus 16:26, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I have created a very stubby article at revolutionary socialism. Homey 16:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment Thats a good start ill add some history when i have the time. Zhukov 19:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as original research. This brand of non-sectarian Marxism appears to exist only in the mind of the author.  DJ Silverfish 17:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. Tachyon01 20:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as OR, as WP:NOT a soapbox, and as a fork article. Any relevant information on here is covered in other articles (Communism, Marxism, etc...)--Jersey Devil 00:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above.  Noble eagle  (Talk)  08:31, 24 June 2006 (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.