Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steps to war


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:54, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Steps to war

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:NEO, only seems to be supported by one or two authors. Page has been complete orphan since 2011. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:55, 26 February 2022 (UTC) That said, the article is not in a great shape overall, with the second half of the lede making various rather strong claims ("shows" etc.) that should either be cited to independent references or removed. My !vote is Weak because I'm not too familiar with any guidelines/policies specific to books. -Ljleppan (talk) 10:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  00:06, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:55, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:07, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I get enough hits discussing and testing the theory in Gscholar, it might be notable. Oaktree b (talk) 18:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep There seems to be non-trivial citations to the book in scholarly literature, with Google Scholar showing 396 citations. While many involve the authors of the theory themselves, and presumably a lot more are passing mentions, based on quick skimming there are plenty that are more extensive coverage:
 * Colaresi, Michael P., and William R. Thompson. "Alliances, arms buildups and recurrent conflict: Testing a steps-to-war model." The Journal of Politics 67.2 (2005): 345-364.
 * Sample, Susan G. "Anticipating war? War preparations and the steps-to-war thesis." British Journal of Political Science 48.2 (2018): 489-511.
 * Sample, Susan G. "From territorial claim to war: Timing, causation, and the steps-to-war." International Interactions 40.2 (2014): 270-285.
 * Slantchev, Branislav L. "The Steps to War: An Empirical Study." (2009): 386-388.
 * Khan, Akbar. "Steps-to-War Theory and Interstate Wars in the Middle East: Is State-Sponsored Terrorism Another Escalating Step?." Journal of Asian and African Studies 56.7 (2021): 1521-1537.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep If someone wrote a whole book about it, and that book was published by a univeristy, it seems notable to me https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691138923/the-steps-to-war The article references the book but doesn't cite it, not sure if I should add it in, having not read the book, even though obviously it talks about the theory.
 * Also this paper, I'll add it in: https://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-275 CT55555 (talk) 05:45, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Just pointing out that the book is not really a solid reference here given that it's written by the people who – as far as I can determine – came up with the theory. That said, there are plenty of independent (i.e. not involving Senese or Vasquez) scholarly works discussing the theory (either directly or via the book advancing it), and hence my (weak) keep above. -Ljleppan (talk) 08:41, 11 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep Not every academic neologism/theory will be notable, but this one has its own entry in the Oxford Research Encyclopaedia of Politics (which contains state-of-the-art summaries of the literature in notable research areas), which is strong evidence of mainstream scholarly adoption of the concept. The bibliography of that encyclopaedia article alone has something like 50 references, almost all of which will discuss this concept. This is very very clearly notable. Atchom (talk) 22:39, 8 March 2022 (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.