This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Matt Lewis (talk | contribs) at 13:28, 1 March 2014 (→Celtic nations: c's). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 13:28, 1 March 2014 by Matt Lewis (talk | contribs) (→Celtic nations: c's)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Celtic nations
- Celtic nations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I propose to delete this article because of content forking. There is a more appropriate article for the subject (Celts (modern)). Fakirbakir (talk) 21:18, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Support: It's also what I call a 'Wikipediaism' - something promoted by Wikipedians, if not pretty much invented by them. It's historically fluff as a term. There was no such thing as 'Celtic nations' when the Celts were around, and they cannot be called 'Celtic' now in any properly academic sense: at most it's a candy word for sports games, historical events and the like. But these endless sub articles just get forked with all kinds contentious politics. I think this article just happens to suit various nationalists in here who want these places to be sovereign countries, and it appears to me that they are largely the people who frequent this page. A section on modern Celtic ancestry should be enough for any properly academic encyclopedia in my view. (ie in the actual Celts article - but this should be deleted all the same, as I argued on the talk page a year or so ago). Matt Lewis (talk) 22:30, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Keep: The two articles are about two different things. One is about the political territories in Europe, the other is about the ethnic (i.e. cultural) group that includes those living in other parts of the world, such as the Welsh language community in Patagonia. Bodrugan (talk) 02:40, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- You are 'Cornish' though. The idea of that being a 'Celtic nation' is just romantic. It's not encyclopedic enough for it's own page - none of it is. It's too political, and it's not historically accurate enough. Celts did not have nations, and Cornwall is not a nation now. Matt Lewis (talk) 13:28, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
keep-merge, Fakirbakir, what are you up to? There are naming issues here, but the way to resolve them is not deleting articles left and right, the solution is coming up with decent proposals for re-arranging the topic and then convincing people to implement it via WP:BRD. Don't try to resolve complex questions of content via the deletion process, it isn't the appropriate tool. --dab (𒁳) 09:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- It was brought to talk last year but no debate happened at all. Everyone who attends the article wants the article that's why. That's partly why WP has have 'AfD'. It's not complex at all imo, it's actually quite simple. There too much forked subs in these areas, and each sub article get's less and leas encyclopedic. Sections in the main article's are fine. I personally think that Modern Celts is an article too much, and I'm 'supposed' to be one! (it's funny how I don't feel very different to anyone else though, and have no desire to forge iron objects at all). Matt Lewis (talk) 13:28, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Keep (don't delete): Agree with Bodrugan's comment, Celts(modern) is concerned with Celtic Identity in modern times (Modern Celtic culture).Jembana (talk) 09:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Categories: