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 no consensus to delete, default to keep. Also no consensus that this is irremediable WP:OR, but (as noted by Guest9999) the article needs to be rewritten based on secondary sources that are specifically about this comparison, or it may be re-nominated for deletion at a later time. Sandstein 21:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comparing Italian Fascism and German Nazism[edit]

WP:OR-filled essay. Hemlock Martinis (talk) 21:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Several active Wiki editors with different political viewpoints discussed and supported the need to break this out of the main articles. It is not original research, but reflects a discussion among scholars that goes back over 70 years. There are numerous cites in the entry, and several of us planned to add more. Creating the new page was the best solution. Give it a chance.--Cberlet (talk) 00:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, very clearly OR in spite of any citations. In order for this topic to be salavaged ... well ... I'm sorry, but this is just an essay and inherently OR. Arkyan 22:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per no sources, and there are many articles already on this topic. See Wikipedia:Sandbox to play around in. --DerRichter (talk) 22:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, WP:OR. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 22:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Needs lots of work, but only one day old. Topic not popular, but should exist. AlbinoFerret (talk) 00:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep There are plenty of sources here, and it looks like commitment is promised (above) to improve the article. I don't see WP:OR or WP:NPOV being a problem if there is already a group of editors with differing opinions working on the article. I say WP:AGF and let it go. Plvekamp (talk) 00:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The topic is well referenced and correctly highlights the differences between German (race based) and Italian (state) fascism. It may not be a popular subject but it certainly merits a place on Wikipedia. Also, the article is only 1 day old. Artene50 (talk) 02:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't mean the subject notable. I could right a page that highlights the difference between Cheese and the Supreme Court of the United States. I could source it well but it would not be encyclopedic. The subject here is the comparison and if the comparison itself hasnt been sourced then it is non-notable and OR. --neonwhite user page talk 14:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your comparison of the relationship between Italian fascism and Nazism to Cheese and the Supreme court is just insane to say the least. Bobisbob (talk) 15:18, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This is why we have pages for Italian fascism, the National Fascist Party, Nazism, the Nazi Party, and Definitions of fascism. Funny thing, most of those articles are sourced! Do we really need one more page on the same exact topic?--DerRichter (talk) 23:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In the same vein, we also have Anticipatory democracy, Athenian democracy, Christian democracy, Consensus democracy, Deliberative democracy, Demarchy, Direct democracy, Grassroots democracy, Illiberal democracy, Islamic democracy, Liberal democracy, Messianic democracy, Non-partisan democracy, Participatory democracy, Religious democracy, Representative democracy, Republican democracy, Social democracy, Soviet democracy, and Totalitarian democracy. Do we really need these pages on the same exact topic? I'm being facetious, but I hope you see my point. Plvekamp (talk) 23:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yea I see your point, but I really do think that it is unnecessary. I know this is different from every other encyclopedia, and is much more, but when you open up a print encyclopedia, the same information would not be reprinted multiple times throughout the book just for the sake of having a new article title. I would argue that this just convolutes the whole project and makes it difficult for an outside reader. --DerRichter (talk) 01:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But we ran out of space on Fascism, and this is a distinct area of scholarship, and a fascinating issue. It help readers. That's the point, right?--Cberlet (talk) 03:26, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Relationship is notable, article has just begun (1 edit prior to nomination!), and there are obviously some editors keen on working on it. Rome wasn't built in a day, and neither were any of the good articles on WP. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yea but using a sandbox didn't hurt either. --DerRichter (talk) 01:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So neither method hurts. Why delete then? Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: Article is not OR, it is well-referenced. Much more can be easily found. It is a notable topic describing the difference and relation between Italian Fascism and Nazism. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as original research. Jakew (talk) 19:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 20:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep encyclopedic, now has a bunch of sources. Give an article a chance. It now has over 10 references; therefore it is not OR. However, I would suggest this page be Moved to Differences between Fascism and Nazism or something along the line. I'm an Editor of the wiki^{[citation needed]} 23:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If this is in fact a comparison of the two subjects then the title needs to reflect that. The currect title is misleading and suggests an article convering two seperate subjects that both already have articles, however, I fail to see why such a comparison is at all notable or in fact encyclopedic. Unless there are reliable sources available that compare these two subjects in detail then it is not notable and constitutes OR. --neonwhite user page talk 14:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are numerous academic books that compare these regimes. This is not an OR, but a notable and interesting subject. Some people think that Italian fascism and German Nazism were the same. No, they were not.Biophys (talk) 04:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Keep, and Move to something else. Generally speaking, we should not allow articles like 'Differences between X and Y', 'Similarities between trucks and apple-carts', 'Comparing boats and tax returns', since that opens a pandora's box of indefinate OR subjects. We can have an article, which could be very interesting, which deals with the relationship(s) between fascist and nazi movements, how the two movements evolved, how they inspired each other, points of disagreement, differences in policy development, and the post-WWII attempts to actively disassociate fascism from National Socialism by contemporary far right movements. --Soman (talk) 19:39, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As long as it can be sourced that this particular comparison is notable and has been covered in reliable sources. An editor cannot simply take two subjects and create an article about the percieved differences that would be original research. My prefered title would be "Comparisons of Italian Fascism and German Nazism". --neonwhite user page talk 03:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't just two random subjects. These ideologies and regimes are related and had an evolving relationship. We've run out room in the fascism article and as I said before much of the details in this subject are irrelevent to that article. How come we don't need it article but we have an article on the left and feminism? Bobisbob (talk) 15:18, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While the two movements had much in common, this article also highlights the differences, which helps in understanding both. Edward321 (talk) 03:19, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep This subject subject deserves an article of it's own. Most of the information here is irrelevent to the fascism article. Bobisbob (talk) 03:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Opinion currently the article needs to be fundamentally rewritten in order to meet our editorial standards, particularly those relating to original research, it also needs a new title if kept - as stated above. I am not able to examine all the sources (books I don't own or have access to) and so cannot give a definitive opinion on whetehr I think the article should be deleted or kept but would say that some of the sources that are used in the article appear to only deal with one of the regimes. Finding information on the two regimes separately and putting it together to make an article would be syntehsis, disallowed as Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought so I think the article should only be kept if sources that specifically compare the two regimes can be found. Having said that World War 2 must be one of the most published subjects in history and I would be extremely surprised if reliable sourcing for a rewritten and retitled article wasn't out there somewhere. Guest9999 (talk) 14:21, 26 May 2008 (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.