Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russian aggression


 * 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. The argument that this should be discussed in context in Foreign relations of Russia is compelling; Wikipedia does not create WP:POVFORKs.  Sandstein  06:25, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Russian aggression
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROD removed without improvement. The topic is vague, too vague to be an encyclopedia article. The author argues that American exceptionalism is also vague. It isn't. It has been a concept developed over 150 years and extensively discussed in politics and in academia. The WP article has 107 references. By contrast, Russian aggression is still a a simple use of two words together, like fatherly pride, or fertile fields, neither of which deserve a WP article. Proposal of ''Russian aggression as an encyclopedic topic is either (a) original research, or (b) a POV problem. By Googling, I can find almost any two words in juxtaposition. That doesn't mean they are ready for an article. Some of the text could be moved to Media portrayal of the Ukrainian crisis. That would be appropriate. Rhadow (talk) 18:26, 12 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom. The claim that this term is a media invention is also textbook POV pushing. Nick-D (talk) 10:26, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep, as evidenced by newspaper usage and academic articles Russian aggression is a legitimate topic with literature dedicated to discuss it. As for Rhadow concern that it is just a "two words in juxtaposition" there is thousands of such words already in Wikipedia, and there should be more. The other concern wich is about POV can be fixed because articles are dynamic and I have only added what is available on the topic both from Eastern and Western sources. The article does not take sides it just describes how it is used and what some analyst think on the term. Yes American exceptionalism has plenty of sources because it has been around here for 14 years, this is how it looked when it was created. Plus one should take into account the language barriers there exist to access more content on Russian aggression, contrary to the the case of Am. exceptionalism. Lappspira (talk) 12:30, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Articles like Foreign relations of Russia and Foreign policy of Vladimir Putin already cover this topic. This is essentially a dictionary definition. While not excusing the Russian Government's clearly aggressive foreign policies in any way, you could probably create an article about claims of just about any country's foreign policies being aggressive - for instance, a Google search for New Zealand foreign policy agressive turns up quite a few viable sources! Nick-D (talk) 10:57, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes redirect and merger into these articles is an option. Second, nobody can deny there is an unique tradition of genuine distrust and/or propaganda towards Russia. A huge country, a military great power with an unprecedented history of expansion that bounds many weaker and smaller states. Russian forgeing policy can cover things like Latin America which is a totally different thing than this. To mix things up is not always better. Lappspira (talk) 14:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete POV issues. Foreign relations of Russia discusses the topic neutrally. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 00:07, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. A textbook WP:POVFORK and an unnecessary one. – filelakeshoe (t / c) &#xF0F6;  22:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete While it is an interesting subject, I believe NOTNEO applies here. If a lot more people would write papers on the subject so we wouldn't have to do so much OR it would be fine. I also think that Depictions of Russia in Western Video Games would be a great article as well, but… L3X1 (distænt write)  03:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is just a combination of words, not a valid subject. Valid subject would be something like Great Russian chauvinism. My very best wishes (talk) 04:22, 20 September 2017 (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.