This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kuban kazak (talk | contribs) at 10:27, 30 October 2007 (→Anti-Russian sentiment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 10:27, 30 October 2007 by Kuban kazak (talk | contribs) (→Anti-Russian sentiment)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Anti-Russian sentiment
- Anti-Russian sentiment (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
The content on this page is not suitable for an encyclopedia. It has become a coatrack for unfounded accusations of anti-Russian sentiment leveled at particular countries. For example we have Britain listed as a country holding anti-Russian sentiment, yet the only evidence is some unfounded accusations by the Russian ambassador in the wake of the Litvinenko assasination. The article cites some survey regarding negative perceptions of Russia: 62% in Finland, 42% in the Czech Republic and Switzerland, 37% in Germany, 32% in Denmark and Poland, 23% in Estonia. Yet we don't see sections on Finland, the Czech Republic, Switzerland, Germany or Denmark in this article, but the Baltic states is listed, even though their level of negative perception is significantly lower than those other countries. The Baltic States section contains only more unfounded accusations from Russian authorities, but no real evidence of actual anti-Russian sentiment. Poland too is listed as is the USA. This article seems to only list those countries that the Russian Federation currently has difficult relations with. The page has become an inflammatory hate page directed at those particular countries, particularly with the juxtapostion of an image of a Nazi inscription "The Russian must die so that we may live" at the top of the article. This kind of thing has no place in Misplaced Pages Martintg 02:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Note This article has been nominated for deletion previously. faithless () 06:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy keep and reprimand for the nomination aimed at nothing but spilling more bad blood as if the Eastern Europe related topics have not yet seen enough. --Irpen 02:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Strong delete as per nomination, and reprimand the previous editor for assuming bad faith. Martintg 02:57, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Martin, please cut it. With editors one knows for a while, there is no need to assume anything. --Irpen 03:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- This article is a mess. It is just a long list of current grievences against other countries, which is four times longer than the historical section. For a model "Anti-xxx sentiment" article see Anti-Polish sentiment as an example of a reasonable article which discusses the historical aspect only. Martintg 03:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- The article's being a mess alone is not a reason for deletion. The article should be deleted if either the topic is non-encyclopedic, which is not the case since Russophobia is a known scholarly term very well established, or, if topic is valid, if the article and its history in the current shape and form are totally useless for the coverage of the topic. Being a mess, largely because it was turned into a battleground by some here, the article contains valid and relevant facts as well as useful references. --Irpen 03:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- The fact than it is impossible to shape this article into something reasonable like Anti-Polish sentiment and remains to this day a coatrack of contemporary accusations defended by a handful of editors who want to maintain the status quo, is reason enough to delete it and start again. A first step to improving this article is to delete the section Anti-Russian_sentiment#Attitudes_and_claims_of_attitudes_towards_Russia_and_Russians_by_country. Martintg 03:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- The article's being a mess alone is not a reason for deletion. The article should be deleted if either the topic is non-encyclopedic, which is not the case since Russophobia is a known scholarly term very well established, or, if topic is valid, if the article and its history in the current shape and form are totally useless for the coverage of the topic. Being a mess, largely because it was turned into a battleground by some here, the article contains valid and relevant facts as well as useful references. --Irpen 03:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- This article is a mess. It is just a long list of current grievences against other countries, which is four times longer than the historical section. For a model "Anti-xxx sentiment" article see Anti-Polish sentiment as an example of a reasonable article which discusses the historical aspect only. Martintg 03:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Martin, please cut it. With editors one knows for a while, there is no need to assume anything. --Irpen 03:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Strong delete It could perhaps be part of a wider discussion elsewhere on the internet but this seems to be a coatstand on which to hang complaints about other people's attitudes to Russia. I should declare an interest here as my own articles have been cited. However I think it is important to distinguish between, and not to conflate, attitudes to Russia/Russians/Russianness and attitudes to the Kremlin. It is quite possible to be a russophile with regard to language, literature and the like, while being an ardent enemy of the current leadership. In the same way, dislike for the Bush administration is not the same as anti-Americanism. Edwardlucas 03:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - the article is not in the best shape but the topic is notable and the article is usable. I have seen quite a few new editors who when arriving to Wiki first check if Rusophobia is present and only checking thet the topic is not omitted agree that the project is not a propaganda tool Alex Bakharev 03:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- While the topic is notable, the article has remained a total mess and has not improved since the previous AfD Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Russophobia. The only solution is to delete it and start from scratch with proper historical sources. Martintg 03:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Nor should this article be used as a propoganda tool to recruit new xenophobic minded editors who believe Britain, the Baltics, Poland and the USA are the main countries exhibiting "anti-Russian sentiment". Martintg 05:34, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete The article inappropriately mixes actions/reactions regarding the Russian government, those who espouse its official positions, and those who are simply Russian; attempting to create evidence of Russophobia. There are a number of topics here worthy of discussion, individually, and if cited from reputable academic research--but that is not this article. PētersV 04:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete without prejudice, ie allow and recommend recreating the article. Article is a mess compared to Anti-Polish sentiment; instead of describing Anti-Russian sediment, it describes actions and allegations of the Russian government. Biased WP:COATRACK to make a WP:POINT. -- Sander Säde 05:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep Subject is notable and cited, and nominator gives no rationale for deletion. Also, it should be noted that the nominator also argued "Strong delete;" that argument should be discounted. faithless () 06:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- While the subject is notable, the problem is the content. The rationale for deletion is that the content not suitable for an encyclopedia. The reason that the content is not suitable is that it is a soapbox of political opinions about current affairs and propaganda hung on the hook of a notable topic, a topic which this article fails to discuss in any great depth. Martintg 10:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep AFD is not cleanup. Deleting an article to start again is not an efficient or persuasive approach since there's nothing to stop the article's advocates from putting all the same material into the new version. Colonel Warden 07:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep. The vitriol used by the nominator actually proves that the article su!bject is notable. As others have argued, the article is in a mess because it is being used as a battleground by Russophobes.--Paul Pieniezny 09:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep. Russia, its language, politics and culture are quite noteable and hence arose conflicting feelings or thoughts. The nominator gave prooves that the article can be made better and expanded with entries for other countries: the nominator also gave information that Russophobia is quite wide-spread. Russophopia is just an object to be described like other objects in an encyclopedia; like other phobias (Antisemitism, anti-Polish sentiment and so on) it can take different forms, from hate towards any political moves of Russian goverment to hatered towards Russian language and culture. --Russianname 10:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- This conflation of dislike for the policies of the current Russian government with a dislike of Russian language and culture and lumped together into one article is precisely the problem with this article. As it stands, this article does not reflect "anti-Russian sentiment" as defined in the scholarly sources, but is a soapbox to propagandise the view that opposition to the policies of current political elite in power in Russia is an expression of anti-Russian sentiment. Martintg 10:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep. There is a strong Baltic Hate group, most likely funded by their governments if not the CIA, who want to polarise wikipedia, there were previous attempts to hijack the article (and delete it), this is disgraceful and does them no credit. The article depicts numerous aspects of current politics, and besides given that the editors themselves are openly opinionated and delete complete refrenced sections with no consensus. Its not the article's fault, its the truth in it that hurts them. --Kuban Cossack 10:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)