Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Squat dance

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Squat dance}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Squat dance}})

Nuke. The article is complete bullshit synthesized from verifiable pieces, so that to a Westerner it looks plausible. But any Ukrainian or Russian person will at once see it is full of nonsense, and the stack of hatnotes says it all. This is not to say that the pictures do display "squat dancing", but it is not a separate dance, but a dance move present in numerous Ukrainian and Russian dances, and it does deserve its own article. But not this one. Repeating, this text must be nuked, at least because the refs cited are either non-verifiable or dubious, or outright hilarious, such as [http://rus-dance.ru/russkiy-tanets-prisyadka-nemnogo-istorii.html this one]. - Altenmann >talk 03:43, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance, Russia, and Ukraine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:18, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• P.S. I started writing a normal article on the dance move, "Prisiadki". You are welcome to help, but please do not use/copy dubious references from :Squat dance. If they were of any value, I would have used them myself. - Altenmann >talk 06:22, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• You've taken a much better route than the two people before you who attempted to rewrite the article, but I think that people would not have objected to your rewrite, and an accompanying rename, as they did to those other two rewrites, which were qualitatively different. That said, clearly the right answer is just redirecting, as even an OUP encyclopaedia {{harv|Cohen|1998|p=357}} uses the informal name "Russian squat dance" for "prisiadka", and I found several other university press books that employ the informal names, "prisiadku (squat dance)" in one from MQUP (apparently Marina Swoboda's translation note on Pavel Svinyin's original), for example. I can tease Drmies a bit by pointing out that we have good academic sources {{harv|Leingang|2021|p=66}} for an in popular culture sentence: The impossibility of the protagonist performing a prisiadka in a barynya was apparently the climax of Boris Polevoi's (Boris Polevoy) The Story of a Real Man. The book is culture, Drmies, and it was popular. {{harvnb|Leingang|2021|pp=63–68}} looks like a source for that dangling hyperlink, by the way. Uncle G (talk) 08:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• {{cite book|title=International Encyclopedia of Dance|volume=1|editor1-first=Selma Jeanne|editor1-last=Cohen|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1998|isbn=9780195123081}}
• {{cite book|title=Amputation in Literature and Film: Artificial Limbs, Prosthetic Relations, and the Semiotics of "Loss"|series=Literary Disability Studies|editor1-first=Erik|editor1-last=Grayson|editor2-first=Maren|editor2-last=Scheurer|publisher=Springer Nature|year=2021|isbn=9783030743772|author1-first=Oxane|author1-last=Leingang|chapter=Stalin’s Samovars: Disabled Veterans in (Post-)Soviet Literature|pages=61–83|doi=10.1007/978-3-030-74377-2_4}}
• There is no such thing as "Russian squat dance", there is a dance move prisiadki (used in many dances), which term has no proper native English equivalent, just as reel or kathakali have no native Russian words. Meaning whoever uses the term "RSqD" has low choreographic expertise. It is like calling Suzie Q a dance. - Altenmann >talk 11:08, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• P.S. Thanks for the hint to Boris Polevoy; incorporated. - Altenmann >talk 11:26, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• User:Uncle G, there's actually a real uncle who's an expert at that type of dancing: Uncle Sandro. You should read about his death-defying move that lands him right in front of Uncle Joe. Drmies (talk) 13:38, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• No opinion about disposition of the text within this article, but if prisiadki replaces it, then squat dance absolutely should redirect there. It is elitist snobbery to simply dismiss actual usage of the term. older ≠ wiser 12:12, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• What a weird remark. The term "squat dance" is used multiple times in my new artricel Prisiadki. - Altenmann >talk 14:33, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• :What's weird? My comment said nothing whatsoever about whether 'squat dance' was mentioned in the prisiadki article. Only that squat dance should redirect to that article rather than simple deletion as you have proposed. older ≠ wiser 16:15, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• The weird part is about "elitist snobbery", which I read as an insult, but I am thick-skinned, so I shrugged it off as "weird". And I propose to "nuke", not "simple deletion". As far as I understand, articles are nuked to start afresh, because they are not worth salvaging even in history. Every single sentence in it is a bullshit. I can start spelling it for you:{{anchor|bad}} "The squat dance (Ukrainian: гопак, hopák." - hell no. "eastern Slavic folk dance" - it is not dance. "arose from military Cossack traditions" - nonsense without any proof, spread recently by various pseudocossack movements. "originated in regions of today's Ukraine" - no evidence of exclusivity. "is also used to some degree in Indian and Hmong dances" - no more that Lindy Hop is used in Circassian dances which have lots of hopping. And so on. - Altenmann >talk 16:54, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• :You describe difference without significant distintion between 'nuke' and 'delete'. In either case the article is gone and you said nothing about replacing with a redirect. In fact, you appear to question the very validity of the term. older ≠ wiser 17:27, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• ::Correct. I do not question its occasional usage, but I looked long and hard to find any choreographer expert in Russian/Ukrainian dance to have in-depth discussion of this dance move similar to the Russian sources I cited, so that I can use their term. I don't want further proliferation of ignorance via Wikipedia. - Altenmann >talk 17:43, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• :::That sounds a lot like elitist snobbery to me. older ≠ wiser 17:50, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• ::::Well, that's how Wikipedia works: WP:RS, you know. I'd like to have standards of WP:MEDRS everywhere besides pokemon and pornstars. - Altenmann >talk 18:00, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• :::::Except Wikiedia very fortunately is usually opposed to linguistic prescriptivism. There is a huge difference between the disinformation and conspiracy theories that MEDRS topics have to combat and how non-Russia/non-Ukranian people commonly refer to this dance move. older ≠ wiser 18:27, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• ::::::{{tq|usually opposed to linguistic prescriptivism}} Huh? I was talking about WP:RS, for God's sake. - Altenmann >talk 20:00, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• :::::::You sounded like you wanted to educate the ignoramuses who use the term "squat dance" that they were talking nonsense and to void the existence of not only the current badly written article, but also negate any redirection of the term. older ≠ wiser 20:47, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• ::::::::I was saying that the whole article is nonsense and gave an ample example here. I didnt say anything about negating redirection. - Altenmann >talk 21:00, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• ::::::This discussion is non-constructive.
• ::::::Various terms have been used,[https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=squat+dance%2Cprysiadka%2Cprisiadka%2Cprisyadka%2Cprysiadky%2Cprisiadki%2Cprisyadki&year_start=1983&year_end=2019&case_insensitive=on&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3] [updated link] and all unambiguous ones should redirect to the new article. But I do see that several books discuss Kiowa squat dance.  —Michael Z. 18:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
• :::::::{{tq| several books discuss Kiowa squat dance}} - that's correct, I saw that as well. - Altenmann >talk 20:03, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

:Delete and redirect. Thank you.  —Michael Z. 18:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

:Interesting. Yeah, I asked ChatGPT about the Squat dance and it had never heard of a Squat dance before. Alexysun (talk) 16:20, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

::Don't even try to pull this monstrocity into editing Wikipedia. It is good as a Turing test and echo chamber (media) amplifier, but hardly a source of wisdom.- Altenmann >talk 17:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: I've read through this entire discussion but it's not clear to me what the proposed Redirect target article is. Is it Prisiadki? I suggest turning down the heat in the discussion and being absolutely clear about what outcome you are seeking.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:49, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

• Delete - concur with the nominator's assessment of the sources. PaulT2022 (talk) 07:16, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
• :Not opposed to redirect to Prisiadki. PaulT2022 (talk) 22:20, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
• Why not WP:FIXIT? Typically when an article on a notable topic is bad and someone wants to start over, they just fix the article rather than start a new one and request deletion of the old one? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 21:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
• :Well, the order was opposite. First I requested its deletion, because the grossly misleading article was a disservice for readers. Then out of curiosity I started looking for good sources and to my surprize I found them in Russian dance manuals. - Altenmann >talk 01:05, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
• Delete and redirect to Prisiadki per nominator's work. The new one seems to be a good article. Llajwa (talk) 21:39, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
• Redirect to Prisiadki as per discussion above. The new article looks great! --Kammerer55 (talk) 03:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
• Delete and redirect per nom: the very premise of this article is nonsense and as it stands it borders on misinformation as it appears to equate two distinct Russian and Ukrainian dances. Akakievich (talk) 18:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
• Redirect to Prisiadki. I am neutral on whether deletion is necessary. Eluchil404 (talk) 22:28, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.