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 speedy keep - merge request should be handled through proper channels. FCYTravis 04:36, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I think this entry should be merged into Racism since this last entry considers racist ("scientific") theories. Leaving it as it is now is, in my opinion of course, a racist POV, as it may let believe that there is such a thing as "scientific racism". I am aware that the entry is not really racist, as it considers it as a pseudoscience. However, the title itself may lead in error - the proof of that is that I was sure, before reading it, that this was some entry written with racist bias. I would also like to add a last point: to my knowledge, "racialism" is the name given to attempts to scientifically justify racism (see Pierre-André Taguieff's works on racism). So, I think we should considers these options:

• merge it into Racism (which should at least include a resume of this, as to let readers of the racist entry use the hyperlink to "scientific racism")
• merge it into Racialism (which, by the way, is really badly written now, claiming that "racialism" is distinguished from "racism" because it has some "political weight" or whatever - whereas it is a synonym of what you fellows are trying to define as "scientific racism")
• if you really don't want to consider those merges, for reasons that I will try my best to understand, you really should change the title. Believe me: maybe for you it is not equivocal, but the simple fact that I read it like this is a probable sign that I won't be the only one. Lapaz 03:04, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy keep. Lapaz doesn't know what he or she is talking about and I imagine did not read the article. The term is a common one used both in historical discourse and academic discourse about race. And if one is not aware of it being a separate term, one could easily consult the books references (one of which features it as a primary part of the title), or any of the over 66,000 Google hits or over 5,800 Google Books hits. Not a neologism, but a specific "type" of racism, one which claims to be based on scientific facts (sometimes contrasted with "base" racism). The article itself is very NPOV: if one actually read the content it would see that it attributes all POVs, and even goes great lengths to discuss the controversies, discredited research, etc. The term is, frankly, pejorative: nobody wants to be called "scientic racism", as it implies the work is not actually "science" but actually just racism. The Google links above show pretty clearly that the term is used, in the same way we use it, by hundreds if not thousands of mainstream sources, the vast majority of which are anti-racist (Stephen J. Gould, PBS, hundreds of academic books). It is completely distinct from racialism (which Lapaz also doesn't seem to understand in a NPOV way), and is obviously a topic rich enough (an entire article's worth of content) to deserve being a separate article from "racism", though it of course should be mentioned in the latter (as it is). --Fastfission 03:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with the similar article Eugenics. Ruby 03:29, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eugenics and scientific racism are related but not the same thing. Read the two articles and you will see this. Scientific racism pre-dates eugenics and also exists completely separately from eugenics; furthermore, eugenics is not always about race, either, nor is it necessarily "racist" (it is often classist, sexist, and many other -ists). "Scientific racism" refers to research which supposedly validates racist ideas; "eugenics" is a philosophy advocating the changing of a society's gene pool by means of selective breeding. Not the same thing at all, though they have intertwined histories (there was much scientific racism in the history of eugenics). --Fastfission 03:30, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep Nominator is asking for a merge. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 03:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This looks like a serious, legitimate NPOV article, and the term "scientific racism" gets over 66,000 hits on Google. Dbtfz 04:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and don't merge with anything, this is a completely legitimate subject in its own right. - Haukur 04:04, 21 January 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.