Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Resurgence of racism in Europe 2008-2011

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. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:32, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Growing anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe from the late 2000s[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

it is highly dubious as to whether this is WP:Synthesis where notability is not inherent. Its also squoting sensational media after a recent event per WP:RECENTISM which casts further doubt ont he veracity of the event as a whole and is furthermore brushing livign people with the pejorative term of "racism." Lihaas (talk) 02:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:OR/WP:SYN, plain and simple. On this basis, whether the individual organisations named are racist or not is irrelevant. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the phenomenon is covered by top outlets like NYtimes and the BBC, along with hundreds other sources, and is a significant aspect of the 2008 financial crisis.--Sum (talk) 03:21, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This whole article reads as if original research. WP should not be used to define an event, which is what this article is trying to do. Arzel (talk) 04:46, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Original research written from a biased point of view, typified by the accusation that Margaret Thatcher's Conservative Party fought back against anti-racism. ~~This article does not support the claim in its title that the phenomenon described is something that emerged in 2008 (nor, for that matter, that it is likely to stop before 2012).~~ Some of the sources cited in this article supposedly about the late 2000s were published before that time period. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Edited my recommendation due to change to the article's title. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:42, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All five sources in the lead are from 2008 on.--Sum (talk) 13:45, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per OR, SYN and SOAP --Reference Desker (talk) 05:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Delete Merge if there is anything salvageable to Racism in Europe, delete the rest. Seems like a PoV split. Monty ₈₄₅ 06:16, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete POVOR--Yaksar (let's chat) 06:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article is clearly biased and based on the writer's own interpretations. It seems like the writer is using Wikipedia as a platform in a campaign directed against certain parties. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 06:43, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as original synthesis. A balanced article called something like Nativism in Europe or Anti-Immigrant sentiment in Europe would be fine, provided that it was based on secondary sources. GabrielF (talk) 14:59, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Major changes: lead section rewritten and more sources added. The article title and the lead section are now supported by two New York Times articles, and others from PBS, Daily Telegraph and Il Fatto Quotidiano. This should clear any good faith doubts about notability and original research.--Sum (talk) 15:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It still seems more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. The phenomenon may be real, but the way it is presented in unencyclopaedic. It could acceptable to have a WP article starting with "Growing anti-immigrant sentiment in late 2000s is a theory proposed by academics X and Y and supported by institution Z...." which presents it as a claim or theory and uses mainly academic sources, but that it not what this article is about. Nanobear (talk) 15:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The New York times is not an "academic source," and its reports are not usually referred as "theories." You have given an argument for rewording the lead opening, not for deleting the topic.--Sum (talk) 15:42, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

note there are not 3 articles that need to be deleted Resurgence of racism in Europe 2008-2011, Growing anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe in 2008-2011 and the current incarnation Growing anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe from the late 2000s Lihaas (talk) 15:51, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Any lead opening with 4 stacked footnotes on a sentence fragment (The phenomenon of growing anti-immigrant sentiment) is a really bad sign from the get-go. The periodization is bizarre, this is not a new phenomenon but an aspect of longstanding historical trends of nationalism and xenophobia, even the article acknowledges 1980s roots — but it was retro even then... All this just gets us to the kernel of the matter, that being this is an Original Essay. Dollars to donuts this is a content fork as well. Carrite (talk) 16:22, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Move/rename. The title makes a statement: "Racism in Europe is growing". Hence the title is "inherently POV". Instead, one should make a slightly different article, something like Anti-immigrant movement in Europe, Anti-immigrant political organizations in Europe or Anti-immigrant laws in Europe. This way it would focus on actual organizations and events (facts), rather than on the "sentiment", although "sentiment" is fine if supported by published sociological data. Hodja Nasreddin (talk) 17:00, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While the article certainly needs renaming a title can have a slant without being inherently POV. In this case there have been long discussions about the increase of far-tight politics in Europe and there have been an increase in far-right MEPs.Tetron76 (talk) 18:13, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As it is, this article does not provide any sound statistical sociological data proving that anti-national sentiment is growing (maybe there are such data, I do not know). Same problems are typical for other "anti-national sentiment" articles. Negative coverage of state policies in foreign press or refusal of investors to invest money in economies of certain countries are interpreted as discrimination or even racism. Hodja Nasreddin (talk) 13:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete deliberate synthesis and POV presentation. reading it makes you think that increasing racism is directly linked to the financial crisis and therefore ok. LibStar (talk) 11:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to ??? Anti-immigration sentiment in the European Union

there are literally 1000s of RS on the topic of rising anti-immigrant sentiment and far right parties in Europe and it is not currently covered on wikipedia elsewhere. I dont believe that this Growing anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe in the late 2000s is a synthesis other than in the time frame where it fails badly.

are even more significant in reflecting a deep and hardening anti-immigration sentiment across Europe [1]
Populist anti-immigration parties are performing strongly across northern Europe [2]
Anti-immigrant sentiment is spreading across Europe[3]

But the biggest problem is that there is no article on wikipedia that a better written version of this information can be contained as nativism is not precisely the same term. The history of this debate is largely connected to increasing Islamaphobia influenced by terrorist attacks and the expansion of the EU but started in the 90's [[4]][[5]] Tetron76 (talk) 13:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 21:35, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename and Expand to Xenophobia in Europe. While I don't doubt the premise, having a name like this violates NPOV and makes it awkward to include source 3,001 who argues there is a steady rate of anti-immigrant sentiment. Further, the longer term history and this topic should be integrated. No harm in having a periodized history section, expanding from the 1980s and 2000s section already here. Consider linking to Fortress Europe.--Carwil (talk) 11:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge encyclopedic content with Racism in Europe for now. While I don't doubt that the concept exists, I don't see the need for a separate article here given the POV issues pointed out. No prejudice towards the creation on an article about Xenophobia in Europe in a general sense. Qrsdogg (talk) 02:22, 5 May 2011 (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.