Login
Login

WP:Articles for deletion/Statesman

: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 merge to Politician. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:05, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

=[[Statesman]]=

:{{la|Statesman}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Statesman}})

Somewhat procedural nomination, per a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion&curid=1003209&diff=473983074&oldid=473814054 request by] an IP user. Their rationale was that the article lacks substance, and could better be suited as an entry at Wiktionary, and I tend to agree. I haven't done a search for any references to build the article, this is more a nomination on behalf of the IP. Steven Zhang Join the DR army! 05:12, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

'Statesman' is a term of respect for politicians and diplomats, and isn't really a distinct field or profession. It doesn't need to have its own article.

69.205.120.39 (talk) 05:28, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Keep. I think this can be expanded to be more than a dictionary definition. Where is the list of politicians who have been commonly called as statesman for example? Anon on talk page seems to think this should be deleted because who is a statesman is ill-defined in English language. It is true this is not a distinct field or profession, but neither is Robber baron. Just in case this gets deleted, remember to move Statesman (dialogue) or the disambig page in its place. jni (talk) 10:51, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

:The robber baron article is specifically about the 19th century term, and discusses it solely in that limited context. The list on that article is a list of 19th century American industrialists. 'Statesman' has no specific context, and the maintainers of its page have already agreed that any list would be inherently POV. The only way to avoid it would be to make it a list of "prominent leaders, politicians, and diplomats", and of course there are already articles on each of those subjects. 69.205.120.39 (talk) 13:52, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:20, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Keep - It's a little bit dictionary-definitiony, but an encyclopedic noun that is apt to show up in the leads of WP biographies, particularly for pre-20th Century figures. As such, this "job description" really does need to show as a bluelink, not red, for the betterment of the encyclopedia. There is certainly much room for improvement, but even in its current state there is sufficient content that a non-native english speaker using en-WP should be helped out by the link's existence. Carrite (talk) 16:18, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

: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.