Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Negrophobia

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Negrophobia[edit]

Del. A fork of "Racism" article. Or redirect there. `'mikka (t) 19:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as original research. There are references to use of the term, but no mention of what they say. Gazpacho 19:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom and as per Gazpacho. wikipediatrix 19:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. --Nishkid64 19:38, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete kill all content forks in the face ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 20:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or redirect I'm afraid, reading the first half of this, that I'm not seeing the problem; this is a common term, I remember the release of The Birth of a Nation DVD used it to describe its own source material, The Clansman. As there are references, I'm not seeing where the fork accusations are coming from. Is there POV I'm overlooking? CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 20:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Although the article lists sources that use the term, it does not refer directly to them. Instead it's mostly tangential material about sources the author believes to refer to negrophobia, although they don't use the word. Note that the primary author has not edited since December 2005 and was uncooperative in attempts to make the article more neutral. Gazpacho 21:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Yet another insignificant and silly elucidation. See also the variant, Afrophobia. --Ezeu 22:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — per nom. Dionyseus 23:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per CanadianCaesar. Danny Lilithborne 00:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. The word has a place in an older book by the same name, published by St. Martin's Press and written by noted author and journalist Darius James, who writes books and articles about Blaxploitation. A more academic book is Negrophobia and Reasonable Racism: The Hidden Costs of Being Black in America, a more academic title through the New York University press, and Negrophobia: A Race Riot in 1906, by Mark Bauerlein with Encounter Press. The word is recognized by the American Heritage Dictionary as well. Combine these with the sources already listed in the article, and it becomes evidence that this is absolutely a necessary article. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect (either to racism or racism in the United States, not sure), term clearly exists as shown by badlydrawnjeff. As the article is not about the term, but about racism, I don't currently see the need for a separate article. Or rewrite the article to be about the term, in which case this comment turns into a "keep by badlydrawnjeff" automagically. Kusma (討論) 11:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll try to rewrite it tonight to at least be a decent stub, but the question is "should this subject have an article." Even if what's there currently is crap, it doesn't preclude a not-crap article. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Since the article discusses no verifiable instance of "negrophobia" except the title of a novel, it would have to be nearly blanked pending a rewrite. Might as well delete it and start over. Gazpacho 17:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - And risk a speedy for recreation? Nah. I'll do some work on it tonight. --badlydrawnjeff talk 17:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete this is clearly a neologism, and doesn't deserve an article. Even if it did, we should delete this POV fork first. Mangojuice^talk 15:09, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Is 1988 (the earliest obvious in-print record I can find regarding its usage) considered "recent" in this case? This term appears to have the ability to be well-sourced in origin by multiple secondary sources, which appears to be what WP:NEO suggests. --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or redirect to xenophobia and/or Phobia.--K4zem 15:36, 25 August 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.