Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinese Century
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:32, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Chinese Century (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)
Per WP:NEO, not notable and due to controversy of article. Goldendarkness (talk) 17:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- (sorry for the mistakes) the same discussion was held on fr.wikipedia three years ago. The article has been kept. Fsojic (talk) 22:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep [1][2][3] Three academic books on the first glance on GBooks. Facts, not fiction (talk) 19:46, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I can understand the nom but the term itself is being used more and more widely and is receiving ongoing press coverage. See this, this, this and this. I think originally there might have been an element of WP:TOOSOON and perhaps even WP:CRYSTAL but it is now becoming a regular feature of Western politico-economic commentary. Stalwart111 (talk) 00:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete WP:TOOSOON still applies. The Chinese Century has yet to happen. Until that time comes, this is WP:CRYSTAL. The topic is better covered at the article Potential superpowers. Mar4d (talk) 13:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- TOOSOON is an essay. What counts here are reliable sources which prove notability, which have been given. Facts, not fiction (talk) 13:35, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:53, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep It's come up in my academic readings, so I can attest that legitimate scholars are using the term. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:52, 29 August 2012 (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.