Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/US Imperialism

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. Mailer Diablo 05:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating several POV articles created by User:Peoplestruth (contribs). Essentially, they are communist propaganda. Here are the articles nominated for deletion:

• US Imperialism
• Kilusang Mayo Uno By popular demand, this article now has its own AFD here
• Left Opportunists By popular demand, this article now has its own AFD here
• Democratic Alliance (Philippines) By popular demand, this article now has its own AFD here

• As nominator, Delete All - BigDT 02:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 02:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not "communist propaganda" exactly but just nonsense.--Jersey Devil 02:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• While it may sound subjective, perhaps have people edit rather than deleting these articles. I'd like to see a democratic process flourish here.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.18.232.6 (talk • contribs) .
• Keep Kilusang Mayo Uno and Democratic Alliance (Philippines), which identify real and notable political groups. Delete US Imperialism and Left Opportunists, which are ntoo meaningful in their present forms. --John Nagle 02:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC). I[reply]
• comment I object to the process of mass nominating articles? You you withdraw this nom and re-nominate the articles seperately? Dspserpico 03:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the articles on the political parties and clean up. Delete the articles on US Imperialism and Left Opportunism. Capitalistroadster 03:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Kilusang Mayo Uno and Democratic Alliance (Philippines). I apologize if these articles sound biased as this is my first time submitting and existing articles are heavily biased against the Left in the Philippines. Also, rather than outright calling to delete these, i advise people to edit and contribute their own knowledge of the subject. Also, calling anything anti-US to be "communist progagand" is VERY POV and is as un-neutral as you can get. - User:Peoplestruth
• Partial keep per Nagle. The political party groups are relevant and important, the other two seem to run into original research issues. Would support a re-nomination per Dsperpico. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa!-E@ 06:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• KEEP Manifest Destiny surely is imperialistic. 70.51.8.62 06:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User's third edit. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa!-E@ 06:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but completely rework - Historically, US imperialism , especially in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century is worthy of an entry, but the content of this article is weak, weak, weak. Hektor 07:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Request nominator to withdraw nomination and re-list separately. These articles don't belong in one group. Vizjim 09:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC) Done![reply]
• Delete get a blog KleenupKrew 10:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment By popular demand, the other articles have been split out from this one. Please see here, here, and here for the other three AFDs. BigDT 12:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There may be an article here, but this isn't it. Dr Zak 12:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete POV article. Vizjim 13:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - In obvious need for expansion, but thats not a reason to Delete! --Irishpunktom\^talk 14:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Content is covered extensively, with citations, without POV, at History of United States overseas expansion and American Empire, among others. At the most, US Imperialism could be a redirect. Vizjim 15:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete per nom and inherent POV. 1652186 18:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete obviously POV and sorely lacking content at that. --Zer0faults 20:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unless someone writes a real article, get rid of it.
• Delete POV, no content. Come back when you have an article. If this was a sentence in the article Imperialism it would be reverted POV Fnarf999 21:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete just POV no content. --Eivind^t@c 21:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and redirect to American Empire, POV and covered better elsewhere. BryanG 22:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's a valid topic but nothing of value is on the page, either someone elaborate on the topic to make it at least several paragraphs of historical and factual info or just delete it. - Patman2648 23:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and redirect to American Empire, per BryanG. hateless 00:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — no useful content and does not accord with naming conventions. Cedars 03:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to American Empire. Metamagician3000 14:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete POV.  Grue  15:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I'm against US Imperialism; and to nominate a article for deletion as "communist propaganda" is competely absurd, this article has nothing to do with communism. However, the poor stated reasons for the AFD nomination of this article don't change the fact that the article itself is essentially a dictionary definition of imperialism with a vague mention of the US is reason for deletion. Tomb Ride ^{My Talk} 15:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. POV. Lacks content to be in Wikipedia. Would be better in Wikitionary. --Quess 17:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as POV. --Strothra 00:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep also known as Yankee Imperialism [1], Benevolent Global Hegemony [2]. See Monroe Doctrine, Reagan Doctrine ect... Are most wikipedia editors from the US? This article could potentially cover more than the marxist pov, and be very interesting. Myciconia 06:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC) [reply]
• Delete, rampantly POV. Christopher Parham (talk) 05:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.