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 "Ukrainophobia" as a redirect to "Anti-Ukrainian sentiment". Keep "Anti-Ukrainian sentiment". --MZMcBride (talk) 23:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainophobia[edit]

:Ukrainophobia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log) The article is completely unsourced, thereby it fails WP:V. As it stands now, I am well within the rights of policy to blank the entire page as WP:BURDEN is not met, as I do dispute the article, in that being unreferenced, it can only be regarded as WP:OR/WP:SYN, and it reads like a WP:SOAPBOX (former oppressor? All of the Ukrainian political leaders....?) We have anti-whatever sentiment articles on WP, and they are warranted so long as core policies are met, which at this stage this article doesn't meet a single one, so wouldn't object to an article in future which complies with policy (i.e. delete without prejudice). Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 05:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless the article is significantly improved. As it stands now it does not comply with WP:V, WP:OR and WP:NPOV. Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Changed to Keep as the article seems to improve Alex Bakharev (talk) 06:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 06:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 06:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - biased original research. Óðinn (talk) 12:09, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete the article would only be acceptable if it were about the term "Ukrainophobia" and the phenomenon (assuming that such a neologism even exists and is widely reported); in its current state, it appears to be mostly just an OR-ish analysis of history and current events. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 17:16, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and improve. Obviously, there is such thing as anti-Ukrainian sentiment, just as anti-German sentiment, anti-Americanism, and so on. There is even anti-national slur like "Khokhol" in Russian. Yes, the article is poorly sourced. Let's source it better and perhaps rename.Biophys (talk) 17:31, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that the sentiment exists, but my concern is that the term "ukrainophobia" may be a neologism that's not widely acknowledged or reported; i mean, there's probably a such thing as "cats that don't like the color blue" but that doesn't mean it's a common term we should be writing an article about. I have changed my vote from "delete" to "weak delete," and I think that if the article is not deleted it should at least be changed to what you suggested (Anti-Ukrainian sentiment) and should discuss that sentiment, rather than the "Ukrainophobia" neologism. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 17:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD is not the place to debate moves. If subject is notable and can be sourced, the article should be kept and then moved.Biophys (talk) 22:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I just moved the article. Should it now be kept?Biophys (talk) 22:10, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, because what remains is still a mish-mash of WP:OR/WP:SYN. The 2 sources which are used do not demonstrate Ukrainophobia and/or anti-Ukrainian sentiment. Also, I have removed unsourced information, please remember WP:BURDEN. --Russavia ^Dialogue 22:17, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, you removed the sources themselves, and you did it without proper debate.Biophys (talk) 22:32, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed WP:EL. Not WP:RS which are being used for WP:V. 2 biographies of 2 people being used as references in the article are not relevant WP:EL. The others, well, they are a mish-mash of unreliable sources and/or do not comply with WP:EL. --Russavia ^Dialogue 23:05, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. As Alex B. said, the topic might be worth expanding; the anti-Ukrainian element is evident in current Kremlin media, either disappearing or reemerging based on their short-term goals. But it does not qualify as phobia. Historical discrimination against Ukrainian culture in the former Empire is a larger topic that should be covered in the mainstream articles of the History of Ukraine, History of Russia, Ukrainian culture etc. series and not POV-forks. NVO (talk) 19:03, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Neologism might be worth mentioning in the appropriate article about Ukranian Russian relations, but insufficent notability (nto to mention the article issues) for stand-alone article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:54, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or rename A phobia is an irrational fear. Having anti-Ukrainian sentiments is a far cry from a phobia. Unless this can be properly renamed, it should go. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:43, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Indeed, the original meaning of 'phobia' is irrational, excessive, fear. However, nuances of words change over time, and nowadays, it's common to classify irrational dislikes -- not just fear -- as phobias. Similarly, 'homo' was once Latin for 'human' -- and has now become the defining root of a number of words related to homosexuality, including homophobia. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 14:34, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Such a phenomenon is quite common in Russia. Jonathan321 (talk) 21:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estophobia. But first remove from Category:Discrimination and remove from template ((Discrimination sidebar)). Move to a different name and delete redirect from neologism Ukrainophobia. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • P.S. - What we should have is some article covering the arguments for and against the existence of an Ukranian nation. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 02:22, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Don't you remember what happened when you last time attempted to reframe a discussion about ethnic prejudices like that? It's quite a dangerous ground. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 14:30, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete In present (I feel there could be no serious improvements in the near future) condition nothing more than WP:OR and WP:SYN. Beatle Fab Four (talk) 02:28, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as Anti-Ukrainian sentiment, this can be built into a reasonable article as there appears to be several scholarly papers and books that discusses the topic. Martintg (talk) 02:48, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - The best case for deletion is in fact made by User:Future Perfect at Sunrise at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Hellenism:

“

Of course there have been people at various times in history who have displayed or expressed dislike of Greeks. And of course other people criticising the former have employed terms like "anti-Greek" or "anti-Hellenic" to describe them. Ancient Judaeans disliking Hellenistic tyranny; Romans disliking Ancient Greek culture; Turks disliking Greeks in 1950s Istanbul; Western media critical of Greek expansion in the early 20th century; Romanians disliking their Greek Phanariot overlords in the early 19th century; Latins disliking Byzantines in the Middle Ages; 20th-century Americans giving preference to their Turkish allies over their Greek ones; proponents of "Afrocentrism" jealous of Greece's perceived monopoly of grand cultural heritage. Of course that's all sourceable. The point is: There is no scholarly literature (WP:RS) that discusses all these disparate historical situations as part of a single story, a single unified pattern or phenomenon. The article commits OR by constructing "a novel narrative" from these unrelated instances.

”

I cannot see any difference between that and this article. The scholarly papers and books that Martintg cites above are nothing more that random references in unrelated contexts. What would be needed are sources that state that this is a "single unified pattern or phenomenon". -- Petri Krohn (talk) 06:37, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This argument is not applicable since "anti-Hellenic sentiment" described in that deleted article spanned from ancient to modern Greece, however it is not applicable in this case because anti-Ukrainian sentiment described is mostly confined to the 20th century, most obvious expression being in the form of the Soviet holocaust. The majority of these books cited are concerned with this period of Ukrainian history and references to "anti-Ukrainian sentiment" is in relation to this period. Martintg (talk) 07:11, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can only concur with Petri Krohn, for what is still in the article is a mish-mash of views on different subjects put together to form Ukrainophobia, hence it is WP:SYN. What you are suggesting is that this article should stay as a WP:POVFORK, whereas if the sources (very little which can be used) are concerned with alleged Soviet holocaust (and I state alleged to inclusion of Holodomor in that list, and which is what I think you are referring to), then this could be more than covered succinctly within the relevant article. --Russavia ^Dialogue 08:29, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainophobia and Anti-Ukrainian sentiment are really two different things, the former is a neologism that may or may not deserve deletion, while the latter is a verifiable fact of life in many regions in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. Martintg (talk) 11:45, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainophobia has a greater usage, than say, oh, I don't know, Putinjugend, yet several editors, yourself included, voted to keep that. Why would one be in favour of deletion of one neologism, but absolutely in favour for the retention of another? Also, I will point out that the reversal of my edit by yourself has not only re-include mispellings, such as Vladivostock, fixes of grammar ("a far smaller access" (yours) to "less access" (mine), but has also reincluded WP:PEACOCK terms in the article; in particular the usage of "some Ukrainians" (being a Ukrainian cultural group in Ufa) and then "several Ukrainian organisation (one of those being the same cultural group referenced for "some Ukrainians"); so WP:SELFPUB letters by the Ukrainian Cultural Centre in Ufa (from 2000 and 2006, mind you) are now being used as evidence of anti-Ukrainian sentiment in Russia? Also, your inclusion of Deputy Speaker of the State Duma in relation to Zhirinovsky may be fact, but is done to portray a POV that Zhirinovsky is speaking for the State Duma, when he is not, he is talking as the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (who hate just about everyone). The funniest thing though, is most of the sources found in Google scholar and books which mention anti-Ukrainian sentiment and/or Ukrainophobia (as opposed to delve into great detail on, thereby qualifying the subject for inclusion as per WP:V), don't relate to anti-Ukrainian sentiment in Russia, but rather in Poland. As it stands now, this is still a WP:POVFORK (of Ukrainians_in_Russia#Anti-Ukrainian_sentiment_in_Russia, from where this information was originally presented) and WP:SYN, as evidenced by the re-inclusion of information relating to the churches in Russia - this has nothing to do with anti-Ukrainian sentiment, but rather, well if you follow anything to do with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, you will know what it has everything to do with. --Russavia ^Dialogue 12:41, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, rename to Anti-Ukrainian sentiment. Even if the article could be considered substandard, deletion is not a valid way to deal with it. Data about ethnic prejudices, however, has a place in any reasonably thorough encyclopædia -- and renaming resolves any lingering WP:NEO concerns. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 12:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I understand that with the proliferation on nation-phobia articles, the first reaction of many is to delete it. Just like any other anti-national sentiment, it is present in real life. This is not a neologism, there is a body of scholarly literature to support it. --Hillock65 (talk) 13:14, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Regarding Poland, there was some historical Ukrainophobia until after WWII (accompanied by Polonophobia on the other end), and the article should probably mention that.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 13:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The article requires editing, not erasure. The depth and the scope of the subject is easily confirmed and notability appears to be in order. Ecoleetage (talk) 22:29, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as Anti-Ukrainian sentiment. The article should cover both Russian and Polish (as well as Romanian etc) historical and current 'Ukrainophobia'. --Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 08:30, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Anti-Ukrainian sentiment. When I saw "Ukrainophobia", I thought of arachnophobia, so I thought there were people scared of Ukrainians and go hysterical when they see them, just like with a spider. I dislike the word "Ukrainophobia" since it is just some made up word, total neologism. I only got 8,460 hits in Google, and Google had on top of the page "Did you mean: Uranophobia". The material is about Anti-Ukrainian sentiment, so it is fine to redirect it to that article. Lehoiberri (talk) 07:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Per NVO and ChildOfMidNight. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 16:08, 30 December 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.