Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winter holiday season(2)


 * 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 as nominator retracted AfD. --210 physicq  ( c ) 02:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Winter holiday season

 * Delete/merge. This article violates Avoid neologisms as per this section of that policy: "An editor's personal observations and research (e.g. finding blogs and books that use the term) are insufficient to support use of (or articles on) neologisms because this is analysis and synthesis of primary source material (which is explicitly prohibited by the original research policy). To paraphrase Wikipedia:No original research: If you have research to support the inclusion of a term in the corpus of knowledge that is Wikipedia, the best approach is to arrange to have your results published in a peer-reviewed journal or reputable news outlet and then document your work in an appropriately non-partisan manner". In accordance with Wikipedia policy this article should be deleted, but reference to the term can remain alive by adding "also known as winter holiday season" at the beginning of the Christmas season article, and by the already existing "Winter holiday season" section of the Holiday article Holiday. To further merit deletion/merging, the fact that the "winter holiday season" does not include such popular late– winter  holidays as Chinese New Year, St. Patrick's Day or St. Valentine's Day, offers strong suggestion that this term is merely a status quo politically-correct euphemism for the worldwide-notable "Christmas season". Other examples of such incidences would include use of the terms "holiday tree", "holiday decorations", "holiday spirit" and other US–originating terms that use the word "holiday" in replacement of the otherwise notably-used "Christmas".&mdash; OLP 1999 05:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * See last debate here Ans e ll  10:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge - changed to Keep - see below. I fail to see the point of deleting the article. It has some interesting bits of (sourced!) information - why should we delete them?  Another question is, under which name? WP:NAME clearly supports user:OLP1999’s argument for "Christmas season": "Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize". On the other hand, WP:BIAS and maybe even WP:NPOV could be interpreted as favoring the neutral name. &mdash; Sebastian (talk) 08:34, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The two are not the same thing, as can be seen from the articles and the sources. See below. Uncle G 11:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Wikipedia does not imply that it is a politically correct organisation, nor should it. If the term "Winter holiday season" is actually used by people to mean the set of western christian holidays, then it is fine. Bringing a personal POV onto wikipedia goes against the Neutrality policy. Ans e ll  10:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Could the nominator explain why they made an edit with the summary "I will not accept Canada as being a part of this garbage"  Ans e ll  10:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That was during a few edit wars concerning the text "In the Northern Hemisphere" versus "In the United States". Since this PC terminology doesn't exist in any other area of the Northern Hemisphere other than the United States (including my country, Canada), I found it offensive to suggest this term is in usage in any other country. Yes, I'm biased against the usage of this term, but clearly WP:NAME and WP:NEO suggest this article should be merged (it already has prominent display in the article "Holiday")&mdash; OLP 1999 17:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The Government of Ontario, The City of Richmond, and The Asthma Society of Canada belie that claim, as any reasonable amount of research would have done, also. Uncle G 11:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 16:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. The term is quite widely used in the media. &mdash;   Da rk Sh ik ar i   talk /contribs  16:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Christmas season. This article was loads better than I expected, and better than Christmas season as well, but that's the most common name in English. "Winter holiday season" is not something that even individual Americans say to each other, it's an official euphemism used by schools, newspapers, and retailers. I'm perfectly willing to accept it as a secondary definition, but it isn't something different. --Dhartung | Talk 16:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is. See below. Uncle G 11:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep The concept of a Winter Holiday season is certainly valid, even if not a widely used phrase, people do recognize and understand it. I don't think anybody here is arguing this doesn't exist.  If they are then enjoy   and .  So far as it goes, I don't see that we should merge Christmas season and Winter holiday season.  The Christmas aspects are a seperate part, and if anything, Christmas season should be merged to Christmas.  However, there are several aspects of the Holiday season that should be broken off from an article about Christmas.  I might be convinced that holiday season (currently a redirect to WHS) should be the name of the main article, if only because there should be content on this time of year in the Southern Hemisphere, where it is summer.  However, I am deeply troubled by the arguments that this is "PC Garbage".  That is uncivil, and borderline ad homineum, so it should be avoided.  Since I don't want to endorse taking actions for such reasons, I'm going to oppose deletion and say keep.  FrozenPurpleCube 19:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: Please don't dismiss an option because of the way it has been put forward. Before this (second) request was written, the article already was tagged with a merge request, added by someone else (me), for quite different reasons. As far as I'm concerned, while I appreciate your three helpful exhibits, I'm not convinced that they describe something different from what has been traditionally called Christmas season. Please therefore consider allowing a merge. Thanks! &mdash; Sebastian (talk) 04:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I'm afraid I can't support a deletion with even the suspicion of misconduct on it. Being above reproach is highly important, especially here, where in my experience, there is a great deal of contention.   For me to even consider this article, it would have to be propsed by someone who is neutral on the subject.  In any case, I think a merge to Christmas season would actually be disadvantegous. If anything, I would say Christmas season should be merged to Christmas instead, and this article kept to reflect that the holidays at this particular time of year are about more than just Christmas.  But I would the Christmas season has enough potential for content as a seperate subject in itself that I don't feel it needs to be merged or deleted. FrozenPurpleCube 18:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This is a case of one editor's personal bias disagreeing with what a large swathe of sources actually say. Wikipedia should go with what the sources say, not with what OLP1999 (repeatedly) wants Wikipedia not to mention solely because of xyr personal bias.  As for merger: As Holiday (which is mis-named, note) clearly states, this is a main article and that is a Summary style summary.  This should not be merged there.  Nor should it be merged to Christmas season, which is part of the Christian liturgical year.  The Winter holiday season is, as the sources clearly say, not specific to Christianity, and not a liturgical concept at all.  As per the last discussion at Articles for deletion/Winter holiday season, all of the citations given above, and the references section of the article, keep. Uncle G 11:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, thank you, that was an eye opener! We're actually talking about two entirely different things here.
 * The Holiday (shopping) season from around Thanksgiving to December 24
 * Christmastide, which runs from December 25 to January 6.
 * We should keep these apart, and I am therefore changing my vote to keep. As a consequence, I also think we should:
 * change "Christmas season" into a disambiguation between the two meanings (and Advent),
 * make "Christmastide" the title for the page on the liturgical meaning, and
 * move the first half of Christmas season to Winter holiday season. &mdash; Sebastian (talk) 21:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I disagree with the assertion that Americans don't actually use this term. I live and work in an incredibly religiously diverse area and use the term all the time (in addition to being inundated by it in the media).I also use "holiday season" and "the winter holidays".  It's not PC, it is an accurate description of reality (ie. many people celebrating holidays during the winter are not, in fact, celebrating Christmas.) I concur that a better name for the article might be "holiday season".  But if anything Christmas season should either be merged into this article, or Christmas. To merge an article with information about Hanukkah and Kwanzaa into one called Christmas season would be misleading & unencyclopedic, regardless of one's personal opinions.  Dina 14:28, 26 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.