Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transformations imposed by the Soviet Union in Romanian Education after the WW II


 * 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. Proto :: type  10:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Transformations imposed by the Soviet Union in Romanian Education after the WW II


This reads (to me at least) like an essay rather than an encyclopedia article. Admittedly it's been improved a bit since I first made that comment to the article's creator, but I don't feel that it's entirely salvageable. The title, for example, is quite POV ("Imposed"), and the introduction reads like a term paper. More than likely, this is an important subject, although in its present form it's not a good way of covering it. It also may be that there are other articles which already cover the same ground in a more neutral manner, but I'm not sure of that. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC) **Comment if an admin gets the chance to fix this one up, the Talk page has been moved to a separate location, which is odd to say the least. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 05:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC) DorianS1 11:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Never mind, turns out I could move it back myself. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 05:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - but overhaul - This is indeed a very important issue. As nom stated, the title is POV, & needs to be changed to a neutral word (for example; stench, smell, aroma...). Other than that, I feel that the article can be rewritten, although it may take a while. It needs to be wikified too. With a bit of tender care, it should become a good article. I would have had no hesitation to delte the article had it been unreferenced, but as it is, it has a number of citations. So because the article only needs to be rewritten, i cast my vote as a keep. Maybe send it to a wikiproject that specializes in the topic, or get someone interested in the subject to work on it. If no progress is made, or it's too big a task, send it back here for a second look... Thanks, Spawn Man 00:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. I let the folks at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Russian and Soviet military history task force know about this article. Not sure if that's the correct wikiproject to have look at it, but I couldn't find a better one. Hopefully they'll have some insight. --Brad Beattie (talk) 02:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: the article repeats itself multiple times, and it needs a lot of work to get it up to an acceptable level of quality. I do not mean to be harsh. This is just an honest assessment. Also, the article has its good points. As for a title, I suggest "Romanian education following/after World War Two" or "Romanian education in the communist era". -- Kjkolb 04:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and re-write. This article has a lot of information but is written in a poor encyclopaedic manner. Atlantis Hawk  06:32, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I understand the impulse to overhaul this article, but really this reads like a "C" paper someone wrote for school and then pasted to the internet. It is very tendentious throughout, with the author making many assertions without much reflection, let alone evidence or sourcing: "Consequently, Romania is today in the stage of development considered by experts as post-communism capitalism. So is the education. The government tries to keep up with European Union goals, and education is parts of its effort to realize a definitive departure from the communist style." If these types of conclusions are to be drawn, there needs to be more thought given to them. While I could imagine an encyclopedia article focusing on the Romanian educational system (and indeed I have no doubt that the Romanian educational system under the Communists was deficient and used for propaganda purposes, as this author asserts), I think in doing so we are well-advised to start from scratch, with a new title but also entirely new content. Thus I vote delete. Allon Fambrizzi 08:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi
 * Delete&mdash;the whole thing is a POV mess, right down to the title. Absolutely yes to an article on reforms in the Romanian education system following World War II, but let's have it on a clean slate rather than have any of this junk lingering around. Everyking 09:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, and recommend the creation of a new article with a new title, as per Everyking. -- The Anome 09:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with Everyking and The Anome, this is a worthy topic for an article. However, the current title is too unwieldy and sounds like something that would be OR.  Furthermore, the article is a mess now, a blank slate with a more concise title is in order. --The Way 11:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP is not a place for POV term papers. Eusebeus 11:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The title was changed as suggested here
 * Delete - this is not the place for essays, even if they are of a slightly higher standard than the "Oh-new-idea-I-thought-up-over-bangers-n-mash-at-lunch" dreck that usually makes an appearance at AFD. Moreschi 12:40, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. The history of education in Romania under Communist rule is a worthy subject.  The article is referenced, verifiable, and informative.  It wants editing, not deletion. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment A potentially useful article could be made out of this, but at the moment it's too much like an essay. Inline citations might help (though they certainly aren't necessary to save this article from deletion). You also need to put a few more dates in. The scope of the article needs defining properly. The title should be something like "Communist education policy in Romania (1946-1989)" (or whatever the correct dates are). Then you'd need sections on "Education policy in the Stalinist era" and "Education under Ceausescu", for example, to show the differences in policy between those two periods. Finally, you could have a section on "Legacy in post-Communist Romania" or whatever to show the continuing effects today. I'm not sure words like "impose" are POV in this context; after all, we're talking about characters like Stalin, Gheorghiu-Dej and Ceausescu, who weren't the world's greatest consensus-seekers to put it mildly. --Folantin 14:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Appears to be an essay and seems to be original research. If anything is salvageable, merge it into Education in Romania. Agent 86 17:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice to recreation under another title and in a different style of writing. The article as-is reads like a term paper and is unsalvageable. —Psychonaut 18:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete with a hope that somebody might make a useful brief article (or part of another article) on the topic, possibly using some of this as raw material.-- Orange Mike 21:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Looks like nothing more than someones essay Caf3623 00:27, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, since the article was nominated, someone has moved it to a far more appropriate name, stripped it down to about half its original size, rewritten large chunks, and added references and citations. It's still a bit iffy, but starting to show some promise.  Xtifr tälk 02:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and rewrite - This article has a lot of potential. I agree that it reads like a term paper but that's just an argument for people to get in there and work on improving it.  --Richard 05:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep the revised version. Worthy topic. The content could be improved substantially, but it's a start. Stammer 09:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Substantially is putting it mildly, and "term paper" is generous (failing term paper, maybe). It may be long, but there is virtually no real information in there. Everyking 10:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Everyking. This is unsalvageable. Pavel Vozenilek 02:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Completely unmanagable title, narrow topic, relevant info should be merged to relevant articles. Rever e ndG 05:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment This is certainly not a narrow topic. It affected the lives of around 23 million people. I would move for keep pending revision. --Folantin 09:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

DorianS1 16:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Thank you for reading my article. I believe this is not a 'POV'. Stalinism could hardly be viewed as 'neutral'. It was not good or bad; it was only bad and it should be mentioned real facts.  It is not an eassy. There were too many historical parts,and I agree with this point but I thought it was required to explain why so many things changed so fast.  I changed the title and could be improved it again. I still wait for suggestions. Any changes to transform it into a real wiki are very wellcommed. I could use these parts in "History of education in Romania" or "Education in Romania". But it could stand  also as an independent article because this topic is something different from the rest. And it is important not only for Romania but for any East-European country or for those who want to know sad facts of communism.


 * Comment Dorian, while I heartily concur with you that Stalinism was by no means a good thing, that doesn't mean that an article can blatantly be anti-Stalinism. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia must remain objective and utilize value-free language.  The article does have some POV problems, though I don't think they are too substantial.  I still think the article should be renamed to something along the lines of '''Education in Soviet Romania." --The Way 20:39, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment "Soviet Romania" would be wrong, since Romania was never part of the USSR itself. --Folantin 20:46, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Coment: the article has been renamed to Romanian Education after the Second World War (old title is just a redirect now). Xtifr tälk 00:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Two things. First, just because Stalinism is a bad thing, it doesn't mean any article making the point "Stalinism is a bad thing" is okay. Despite whatever laudable moral purpose you may have in writing the article, it still is conclusory and not backed by any apparent research into the subject. Indeed, the article is still a series of general conclusions about the subject instead of anything providing actual information. Second, the article makes claims about things other than Stalinism, including Romania today. So your conclusions may be true, but you need to back them up. Allon Fambrizzi 02:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi
 * Comments In other words, read this section about NPOV on Wikipedia  ("Let the facts speak for themselves").--Folantin 10:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Still Delete, strongly. Every single paragraph is almost 80% strongly POV. There continue to be phrases like In Romania the socialist regime tried using education chiefly as a main way to justify it. They tried to instil passion only for manual labour and discourage intellectual pursuits., which are not backed by inline citations, and are frankly disputable as billy-o. Two of the minimal references discuss the Republic of Moldova, not to Romania, as the essay purports to discuss. One of the remainder is a study of Roma education in particular, not relevant to the article as a whole. In addition, there's a link to the Library of Congress site and the Church. This is someone's college essay. If a freshman handed it in to me, it would be given a C. The only thing saving it from a C- is that there arent that many spelling mistakes. Hornplease 09:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WMMartin 17:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep to allow for further [massive] rewriting (mainly to cite sources and alter to adhere to NPOV). Worthy topic, and despite the problems that are mentioned it seems salvageable. Suggest revisiting this article in 2-4 weeks if sufficient progress hasn't been made.  Markovich292  00:38, 22 November 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.