Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Socialist Crisis in France

:{{la|The Socialist Crisis in France}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Socialist_Crisis_in_France Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|The Socialist Crisis in France}})

Reads more like a political essay than an encyclopedic article, already covered by existing articles like Paris Commune, Dreyfus affair, etc. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

• Merge / Redirect over to Paris Commune since that's the proper article for the topic that's being covered. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:03, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

:: No, that's not a correct target. The Paris Commune was an incident from 1871, this piece is on the politics of 1899-1900. Carrite (talk) 05:40, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 19:24, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 19:24, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:12, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:12, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

• Comment. The nominator is largely right in saying the article reads "like a political essay", but he (and the subsequent commenter) have not realised why. On close reading, the article is actually intended to be about a probably notable essay - or, rather, series of articles by Rosa Luxemburg, published in Die Neue Zeit in last 1900 and early 1901 and then collected and issued separately as a short book, on arguments then going on among French socialists about whether or not they should co-operate with "bourgeois" politicians in supporting Alfred Dreyfus, in defending the French Third Republic against perceived attacks from right-wing groups and in joining the French government to help with these aims. Luxemburg was firmly on the side of those opposing any such co-operation - she deals with earlier events like the Paris Commune, but only as background to current arguments at the time of writing. The articles, I understand, caused something of a sensation at the time, and the book later became something of a Marxist classic. The reactions to it, both immediately on publication and since then, have probably been significant enough to justify a standalone article - unfortunately, the article as it stands seems to be (somewhat confusedly) summarising the book rather than showing why we should regard it as notable. PWilkinson (talk) 13:11, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
• Delete - Unsourced original essay. Carrite (talk) 05:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
• Delete - this appears to be a meta-essay: an essay or critique of a 115-year-old monograph. I say, start from scratch to get a stub. Bearian (talk) 02:08, 12 September 2015 (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.