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. Not really sure what consensus is here, although it's not for deletion in any event. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brownism[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Like Blairism, excluding these BLP concerns, it seems like a WP:SYNTHESIS of 'here's Gordon Brown's views and here's who agrees with him', except unsourced as well. Ricky81682 (talk) 04:36, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

comment. Really we need separate pages on "Brownist" and "Brownite", with this is as a disambiguation page. --Paularblaster (talk) 09:40, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate at minimum. "Brownism" has a much more significant meaning that is prior in historical right; it described the followers of Robert Browne, an English church reformer who wanted a congregational church polity. Those articles want expansion, and I may get around to it some day, but that was what I thought I would find when I followed the link. The instant subject would appear to be more fully covered in the article Premiership of Gordon Brown. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:26, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Blair-Brown government or to something else. The rift between two groups with in Britain's Labour Party is an important topic, and perhaps it's unfair to compare this article to the better written (Blairism), but I think it's a subject that needs to be treated for what it is, a dispute within a political party. Mandsford (talk) 16:50, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:06, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:06, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to whatever article deals with Brown. Decidely not notable enough as a term for a WP article. Collect (talk) 20:26, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep You can put in the name of almost any american president followed by the word doctrine and get an article. Why should british politicans be any different? I also note Blairism was kept. Stupidstudent (talk) 01:02, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Stupid is not so stupid. - Ret.Prof (talk) 22:57, 9 November 2009 (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.