This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 16:00, 2 February 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 16:00, 2 February 2022 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)- 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. Stifle (talk) 15:34, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Anti-Hungarian sentiment
AfDs for this article:- Anti-Hungarian sentiment (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Page was deleted in 2007, but it was later recreated in 2009 with almost the same content. Plz delete it. --maxval (talk) 09:48, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete as unencyclopaedic. This article is just a list of non-notable events, presented here as grievances of one nation against its neighbors. --Yopie (talk) 16:31, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete same arguments used in 2007 should apply here --Kvng (talk) 16:35, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
* Delete its unencyclopaedic. --maxval (talk) 16:51, 27 July 2010 (UTC) struck repeat vote by nominator Otto4711 (talk) 04:43, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- Speedy CSD G4. MSJapan (talk) 17:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep It is stupendous.
One, multifarious articles exist about anti-national_sentiment on English Misplaced Pages. Second, Maxval is being blocked on Hungarian Misplaced Pages for a month for hated speech. Yopie is a quite disruptive one, whose agenda is to delete Hungarian realated content from Misplaced Pages with a poor command of English. I promised him to report to the Arbitration Committee that I am ready to redeem. The another ones just encroached upon the deletion process without having a proper knowledge on the topic. So that it is stupendous.--Nmate (talk) 20:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I am blocked on Hungarian Misplaced Pages because I proposed deletion of the same article there. Hungarian chauvinistic Wiki administrators blocked me for this reason. They even blocked editing of my own editors page - this is clearly against all rules. --maxval (talk) 07:07, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Comment This is manifestly not true. You've been blocked because you used crude language, hateful expletives, e.g. you told one Admin, 'F... you, you Arrow Cross lover! I'm leaving this filthy, chauvinistic shithole right now.' See hu:Szerkesztővita:Maxval#Hangnem --Pagony (talk) 12:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Comment Not true. I never used the "fuck" word. And plz try to see what has happened before that. Being admin is not the same as having rights to violate Misplaced Pages rules. And I prefer telling the truth - if an admin is a chauvinistic pig, then I won't hide my opinion. I won't participate any more in your nationalistic pseudo-Wiki project, so don't worry, you can create even more chauvinistic articles, no problem for me. But plz try to keep your shitty racist propaganda only in your shitty racist site. Your racist and chauvinistic approach is not welcome elsewhere. I am receveing every day severeal hate mail from your admins, users and their supporters in my email box, plz tell them that being a little civilized won't hurt... --maxval (talk) 16:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Anti-arabism, Anti-Semitism, Anti-German sentiment, Anti-Iranian sentiment, Anti-Americanism, Serbophobia, Anti-Romanian discrimination, Antiziganism, Anti-British sentiment, Anti-French sentiment in the United States, Francophobia; Anti-Turkism, Anti-Russian sentiment, Anti-Polish sentiment, Anti-Italianism, Sinophobia, Indophobia and a great deal more. I can hardly believe that everybody loves Hungarians so much that this phenomenon is simply non-existant. I have also difficulties to believe that all the other similar articles deal with realistic issues but Hungarians seem to be so lovable that the article at question contains only unencyclopaedic information and a list of unwarranted grievances by some Hungarians against their neighbors. Rokarudi--Rokarudi 23:42, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - there may be an article to be written on the subject of anti-Hungarian sentiment but this ain't it. Four of the five sources are thoroughly unreliable (the fifth is not in English so I can't make a determination). The article engages in original research by synthesis by taking incidents which may or may not be related to one another (a politician making an anti-Hungarian remark, graffiti on a Hungarian monument, etc.) and asserting that they are evidence of established anti-Hungarian sentiment. While I did not review all of the counter-examples offered above, those I checked now and those I've read previously all contain a multitude of references in unquestionably reliable sources. The existence of one or a series of articles on various prejudices against various races and ethnicities does not in any way justify articles on this or any other such prejudice since each article stands or falls on its own merits and available sourcing. Suggest that any interested party write and properly source an article on the subject in user space and have it reviewed by a third party before it is moved to article space. Otto4711 (talk) 00:05, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- delete My hovercraft is full of eels. per nom Weaponbb7 (talk) 03:28, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete I think there is a subtle but important distinction between ethnic rivalries in the region (which may be more about political positioning), and the idea of an anti-hungarianism that is more widespread and based on stereotypes. I have no doubt that with enough research, anti-hungarian sentiment could warrant an article (hopefully its not too widespread), but as Otto points out, this isnt it. this articles current content can be safely deleted. i would support Ottos suggestion to offer the article re-creation to an interested party. unrelated, humorous aside: I would recommend we create an article on Anti-Belgian sentiment, but perhaps its better to not say anything about them at all.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:05, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep as per Rokarudi. Furthermore, it should be kept in mind that the deletion of this (or any) article does not make the given phenomenon non-existent. – Tomeczek 09:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep unfortunately, it is not only existent, but permament. The deletion request of Maxval is a part of his trolling in Hungarian Misplaced Pages for what he has been blocked. Gubbubu (talk) 09:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep as per Rokarudi. I would've thought it was quite obvious. Maxval has been carrying on a one-man crusade against what he takes for Hungarian nationalism in Huwiki -- and each time he stuffs his edit summaries with hateful expletives against individual editors there. What is nonreliable here is Maxval and Maxval alone, not the article. --Pagony (talk) 10:00, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep MAXVAL is hungarian notoriety swindler and inflamer in hungarian sites —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.228.142.199 (talk) 12:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- It is unencyclopedic, no special definition of the term can be found anywhere in the reliable sources. The cases mantioned can be used in an article "List of anti-hungarian violence cases" or something of that sort. Wladthemlat (talk) 12:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Note: I believe that deleting this article for being unencyclopedic means that all similar articles should be deleted for the same reason. I do not think that one nation can be considered more encyclopedic than an other. I am afraid, though, that anti-national sentiment is a real issue (for (almost?) all nations). I have tried to do a quick search using Google to find out if there is something on the internet on anti-Hungarianism. I did not intend to do a thorough search, however, here are some links that may be of interest: , , , , ]. If the only issue is the poor content of the article, one might as well find useful information in these to improve the text. Szaszicska (talk) 13:52, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, it's a poor sourced original research by synthesis. There may be an article to be written on the subject, but the encyclopedic proof is missing from this article. There is nothing to improve, should be rewritten. Karmela (talk) 15:42, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Per Rokarudi and Pagony. The subject is exists and notable, the article can be improved. Also it's a bad practice to export the edit wars from huwiki to enwiki like Maxval does, with his uncivil style. Gepcsirke (talk) 19:34, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep as per Rokarudi, even if the article should significantly be improved. For example, Lucian Boia's book could also be used. Borsoka (talk) 20:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, the topic is noteworthy but the current article is crap. --Tgr (talk) 21:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- BLOWS WHISTLE - the personal attacks and accusations need to stop. This is a discussion about an article on the English Misplaced Pages. This is not the place to re-ignite a flamewar from the Hungarian Misplaced Pages. Settle your differences in your own back yard, ladies and/or gentlemen, because it's not welcome here. Otto4711 (talk) 22:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep as it was sad above, this nomination is a result of a saga laden with fierce debates, personal attacks, blocks that the nominator received for them, all on the Hungarian Misplaced Pages, not here. The nominator was never even intrested in this article only the parallel article written in Hungarian. Maybe the Hungarian article is crap or biased or whatever, but those issues he has can't be resolved here. In fact the article was a single sentence before(check the article history before july 25th), so it's very clear everything, all his problems were about the article in Hungarian which is couple of pages long. So the debate needs to be sorted out there where it actually took place, and be about the article that was actually the problem . Of course personal attacks made on enwiki are still actionable on enwiki. Hobartimus (talk) 06:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
- Weak keep My biggest issue is the nomination stating that the article was recreated using the exact same text as the reviously deleted article. The articles current history does show a degree of evolution. I am not fully convinced that argument is indeed correct. Can an admin who can view deletion history verify this???., That aside as it does not fully impact the current discussion (just may add a bit of perspective to the discussion) as we look at the article today not yesterday anyway. One primary motivation for deletion last time was that the article was full of synthesis and original research. Is that an issue today? This article is referenced albiet these references should be improved. This is mainly due to the article being extremelely POV (borderline still a synth issue, but limited in its OR in my belief) on the selectioning of events discussed. I dont believe the sake of other articles (anti-X) existing should impact this article (See WP:OTHERSTUFF for further rationale behind this), with this article alone, i do see some oppertunity to improve the article if someone were to take the time, so i would side on a weak keep.Ottawa4ever (talk) 12:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence of notability given in article. Compare with Anti-Irish racism, which does a better job of showing the notability of the subject.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:12, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
- I collected a few sources at Talk:Anti-Hungarian_sentiment#Sources - writing them into the article will be left to someone else though. --Tgr (talk) 13:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
- keep as the subject is valid (cf Anti-Romanian sentiment). I agree that the article is rather poor in its present form, yet I cannot agree with deletion since it would make it more difficult for someone to start a more encyclopedic article on the subject. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 11:03, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - This is a tough one. The article at the moment probably barely contains any encyclopedic text, which would qualify it for speedy deletion. There are two heavy arguments against its (repeated) deletion. First the deletion request is obviously another episode of some unfortunate events that have taken place on the Hungarian Misplaced Pages (which is quite surprising considering the fact that the HU Wiki is normally a peaceful place, where editing's a joy, really :P), which means the deletion nomination itself shows HEAVY bias. Second the topic itself is of very important nature. To understand this second point a bit more, let me give you a brief story:
collapsing details which are off-topic for an AfD discussion |
---|
|
- Delete per arguments used in ]. Since the article itself was not changed, the POV parts were not removed therefore basicly it´s still the same article and the result of the latest discussion about deletion applies here as well. --EllsworthSK (talk) 23:18, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
- Note The above voter, Ellsworth, was notified of this discussion by user:Yopie the notification is here and a similar one. It's notable that there were no notifications by Yopie to people who voted keep. And I think if any fair minded person reads the above post by Ellsworth ( the one with "nationalistic propaganda and generalistaion" in it) has no doubt about his attitude on the topic "Anti-Hungarian sentiment"... 06:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
- The section referenced above is a proposal to rewrite the article. How does this support a Keep? --Kvng (talk) 18:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
- The articles listed in the section demonstrate that the subject has received substantial coverage, thus meeting Misplaced Pages's notability standard. --PinkBull 18:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
- 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.