Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Domestic containment in post–World War II America

: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. Deryck C. 13:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

=[[Domestic containment in post–World War II America]]=

:{{la|Domestic containment in post–World War II America}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Domestic containment in post–World War II America}})

There are no reliable sources presented for any information which could be relevant to the article or the term. I doubt that they exist. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Comment - I thought for sure this was going to be a well-meaning college student trying to turn a term paper into an encyclopedia article. I was surprised to see this is a fairly old piece with a number of contributors in the history. The title is unencyclopedic — a neologism or unsearchable phrasing. Essentially, this relates to American domestic repression during the post-WWII "Second Red Scare." I think it is probably an encyclopedic subject, if structured correctly. I think it is probably also a fork of some sort that needs to be merged to one or more articles. No specific opinion at this time, this is a fairly complicated case. Carrite (talk) 19:30, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep There are numerous sources available for this including:
  • :# [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=KKGdxuRFD_cC&pg=PA201 The Columbia history of post-World War II America]
  • :# [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=oKdalT-JurQC&pg=PA380 Major Problems in American Popular Culture]
  • :# [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=uEGZHZGK4S0C&pg=PA2 Pressing the fight: print, propaganda, and the Cold War]
  • :# [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=tjFwKgNH0b4C&pg=PA305 George F. Kennan: Cold War Iconoclast]
  • :Finding these sources was just a matter of looking. Please see WP:BEFORE. Warden (talk) 00:08, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
  • ::No two of those sources have the same definition for the term "Domestic containment". Certainly, none except Kennan, and possibly the Columbia history, have our definition. The second specifically referred to containing gender roles, rather than other societal roles. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 00:28, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep Read the article, and looked through the news results. The L.A. Times [http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/66416988.html?dids=66416988:66416988&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Mar+12%2C+1989&author=Constance+Perin&pub=Los+Angeles+Times+%28pre-1997+Fulltext%29&desc=A+%60Herstory%27+of+Private+Life+in+the+1950s+HOMEWARD+BOUND+American+Families+in+the+Cold+War+Era+by+Elaine+Tyler+May+%28Basic+Books%3A+%2420.95%3B+284+pp.%3B+illustrated%3B+0-465-03054-8%29&pqatl=google] reviews Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold War Era by Elaine Tyler May, and talks about containment of the Soviet threat as well as domestic "containment". Mentions the gender roles. St. Louis Post-Dispatch reviews the book as well, but is hidden behind a paywall. I believe this is a real thing, and this is the term used by reliable sources. Dream Focus 18:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment - I'm with both Carrite and Dream Focus here. First impressions were that the content had been adapted from a term paper, but this is largely due to its peculiar style and tone. The general subject itself does seem encyclopedic and sourceable, though, so I'm inclined to say that it's probably something we want to consider keeping around.   — C M B J   04:10, 24 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.