Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:45, 14 July 2008

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 May 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

Requested move

The article is largely about fascist ideology, and can probably be expanded to include non German or Italian proponents that were influenced by the two. It is not necessarily comparative.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 23:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

• Support as well as the nominator's reasoning, the title sounds a bit textbook-y. PeterSymonds (talk) 07:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
• Support - the current title sounds like an essay. Think outside the box 09:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I just redirected Italian fascism here based on a discussion on that talk page. Almost the entire article is uncited. Some good stuff, but it is an uncited Fork, and anything that can be cited belongs here.--Cberlet (talk) 17:46, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Why is Italian Fascism now directing to "European fascist ideologies?!!! Italian Fascism is about ITALIAN Fascism not European fascism!!!

Whoever made this link from Italian Fascism to "European fascist ideologies" has made a poor decision. I will revert this as soon as possible. It is unacceptable because no other academic source automatically links Italian Fascism to other European fascist ideologies. They call Italian Fascism what it is...Italian Fascism.--R-41 (talk) 23:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Please calm down. Most of the Italian Fascism page is uncited. The suggestion to redirect was made weeks ago. The decision of a number of other editors was to create this page. Try to work collaboratively.--Cberlet (talk) 02:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, get citations, restore the Italian Fascism article. This subject of the Italian Fascism article is very important and unique which should be its own article. If we scrap the Italian Fascism article into a page describing European fascist movements in general not enough information will be able to be put on the page, and the result will be a small generalization of Italian Fascism, in order for the article to give space to describe the other movements. Deleting the article to me seems to minimizing the view of the influence of Italian Fascism to just have it listed as one of many fascist movements while Nazism will remain having its own article. There is no reason to scrap the Italian Fascism article just as there is no reason to scrap the Nazism article. If the Italian Fascism article is scrapped, you must scrap the Nazism article as well, because its information is repeated across Misplaced Pages. It is important that it has its own article to explain in detail what Italian Fascism exactly was and especially what its impact on Italy and the world was. Certainly more citations are needed, but the scrapping of the article entirely is a very bad idea from my perspective. Furthermore, all this article talks about his relations between Mussolini and Hitler, it's more poorly done than the Italian Fascism article was, and there is a good deal of reason for having "European fascist ideologies" to be put into a subsection on the "Fascism" article. This article to me appears un-needed, the "Italian Fascism" article is needed for the reasons I explained above. --R-41 (talk) 02:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Please pay attention. There is already a page on the National Fascist Party of Italy, as well as Fascism and European fascist ideologies. There is no need for a badly written uncited page that is a POV fork.--Cberlet (talk) 02:47, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, it needs a re-write, not a scrapping. If anything, European fascist ideologies could be put into a subsection of the "Fascism" article. If there was a badly written page on Albert Einstein in which information on him was discussed in other articles would you scrap the Albert Einstein article and have it redirect into an article called "Physicists of the world"?--R-41 (talk) 02:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Once more, there are two articles for Nazi material, one the Nazi Party article and two, the article on Nazism. Should the Nazism article be scrapped?--R-41 (talk) 02:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Editors on the Fascism page created this page to make the subsection smaller. The Fascism page grew too large. We are shuffling pages and combining them. If they also get too large, we can create more pages. But for now, Italian Fascism belongs distributed with proper cites to National Fascist Party of Italy, Fascism and European fascist ideologies. Please learn to work collaboratively, or take a break from Wiki and regain your composure.--Cberlet (talk) 03:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Please do not patronize me. My concerns are legitimate. I work collaboratively best when people are cautious with what they do. My reaction was one of aghast because of how drastic and sudden the change was and how it was decided by only three people. You have not answered my question about what the implications of this may be on the article of Nazism. It is a European fascist ideology as well, should it not be put into this article? I doubt people would support that because of its individual importance. Furthermore like I said, there is an article on Nazism, the Nazi Party, and Nazi Germany - that's three pages on highly similar subjects, but each have or at least should have their own specific focuses. A bad article on Albert Einstein wouldn't result in its deletion because it is an important individual topic. Is Italian Fascism not an important individual topic? If so why? Please answer these inquiries, because deleting the Italian Fascism article will have consequences for other similar articles on Misplaced Pages which may end up being deleted for the same merits. For me, an article on the National Fascist Party should focus on the development of the party and primarily describe its internal structure and organizations attached to it. Italian Fascism should focus specifically on the ideology alone and the relevance of Italian Fascism to the development of other small-f fascist movements. The Fascist Italy topic is divided between Kingdom of Italy (1861-1946) and Italian Social Republic articles, these should focus on the impact of Italian Fascism on Italy. I have perhaps put too much detail into the Kingdom of Italy article which could be transferred to an Italian Fascism article. There's an entire encyclopedia on Fascist Italy available, it basically is the paper-bound Misplaced Pages for every bit of information available on Italian Fascism, and it is vast. Italian Fascism is one of the two most important fascist movements in world history (the other being Nazism), and for eleven years until Hitler's rise to power it was the dominant fascist movement in Europe. There are many books and other media which are entirely dedicated to studying Italian Fascism as an individual subject, not as one of a clump of a number of ideologies. This is my basis for an Italian Fascism article. You may be right that there should be a page for European fascist ideologies, but scrapping the Italian Fascism article will lead to the same build-up of material in the "European fascist ideologies" article as was the case in the Fascism article. An independent article for Italian Fascism seems reasonable to me, all it needs is good sources and more indepth material. Would that be acceptable?--R-41 (talk) 03:58, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I am not patronizing you, I am asking you to work with a group of editors with widely divergent politics to sort out a series of related pages, many of which have grown way to long to abide by Misplaced Pages standards. The procedure is to develop a strong, well-cited, section or sections on existing pages, build consenses for NPOV and scholarly cites, and then discuss moving blocks of text to new pages. The page on "European fascist ideologies" was originally set up to encompass material from several sections on several pages, and is, in fact, the place where we intend to discuss the differences and similarities between Italian Fascism and German Nazism. You would know this if you had read the discussion pages for the related pages over the past year...and yes, on controversial pages where there is a lengthy ongoing discussion you are supposed to read the discussion pages in detail before making major unilateral decisions. I am well-versed in the field of fascist studies, have published several scholarly journal articles on the topic, as well as several book chapters, and understand that Italian Fascism is an important area of research. Even so, I do not demand that only my POV, favorite authors, and arrangement of contents must be implemented. The note on Italian Fascism that it was destined for the scrap heap of Wikihistory, was clearly posted on that page's talk page for a long time. If you objected, you could easily have chimed in and joined a collaborative effort. So perhaps you could start by building up the text inside exisiting pages with cited material, go through some discussions, and then post a note that you plan to recreate the Italian Fascism page by pulling material from the exisiting pages. That is what we all have been doing, and while it sometimes gets fractious, in the end it all seems to work out. There is no emergency. Readers of Misplaced Pages can already find much cited NPOV material on Italian Fascism here. But a page that is 95% uncited text is not acceptable. The current mandate here, all the way up to Wales, is that uncited material must be pruned. Please join us in our collaborative effort on the fascism-related pages.--Cberlet (talk) 14:16, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

R-41, you know I completely disagree with you on many aspects of things but here I shall speak frankly. You see the problem here is Cberlet is a propagandist and an anti-educationalist, he has made a career out of that. Whilst you are anti-fascist, you have at least studied the topic of Italian Fascism and look to present it in a NPOV truthful manner; Barelet does not want that. I support not having Italian Fascism going to a redirect too and so there is no consensus to merge, since its such a major topic and the Italian variation is the original and most significant.

The best policy is to completely ignore that Chip Berlet is there. He knows absoutely nothing about Italian Fascism, his sole interest is to abuse Misplaced Pages's fascist articles to attack the right in the USA. He trolls these articles (albeit under calmly worded phrases and false claims of consensus) with said dubious motives attempting to blur the history of these subjects. Just carry on creating education information as if he didn't exist. Also please see Talk:Fascism for a section I have wrote on the movement. - Gennarous (talk) 00:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)