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 List of dictators. I know some of you wanting merge also wanted deletion, but the GFDL creates an issue with that, and this makes a fine redirect. Mangojuice^talk 05:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of dictators currently in power[edit]

Fails to add any value to parent "List of dictators"; created simply to push POV of one editor

• Keep Any listing like this one will always have some PoV issues but most current political articles have the same problem. Knowledge in this field is never absolute nor is it ever absent of bias. To exclude such information from Wikipedia is to limit it unnecessarily. I find the listing useful even if controversial. Let a thousand flowers of debate bloom. Ggads 11:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Aside from the POV issue (no annotations as in the parent, etc), this creates a synchronization problem that is unnecessary. A small change to List of dictators highlighted the rulers "currently in power", satisfying the only organization convenience this list might have had. LotLE×talk 01:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Fully valid, as discussed in the AfD's for List of Dictators, and this list is very useful, separating all of the outdated rulers from the ones in power today. Anyone interested in international relations should value this list. AdamBiswanger1 01:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I also want the map to stay somewhere, either list of dictators or list of dictators currently in power.--Antispammer 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep no more POV than List of dictators, and the map does seem useful (if anything, underpopulated, but that's another matter). Opabinia regalis 02:51, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The map is useful only for circumventing Wikipedia's NPOV policy by ignoring the intense controversy surrounding the labelling of these countries as "dictatorships". Furthermore, you cannot justify the retention of this article by comparing it to an article that most people thought should be deleted. -- WGee 04:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Today dictator, tomorrow valuable ally (or vice versa). Too controversial topic for living people. Pavel Vozenilek 03:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your take on this is wrong. Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan, a dictator, is an ally but we still list him.--Antispammer 08:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Both your takes are wrong. This is an international encyclopaedia with a neutral point of view. It does not have allies and it is not presented from the viewpoint of any single country. Uncle G 09:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, inclusion of Raúl makes the case. Acting dictator for another dictator? Just reverse the lists in the main article, which are sorted by date. Gazpacho 03:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, this is a creep back toward Category:Dictators, which has already been rejected.

Gazpacho 03:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I disagree with your assertion that one bad entery should get a list deleted. Woudn't removing the particular entery make more sense. That appears to be shakey grounds to delete the entire article. Also checking the article shows that he is no longer listed making that point moot. --Edgelord 18:24, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per Lulu. List of dictators provides for (albeit meagre) counter balance and explanation (though no serious analysis or references to such studies I note). This list fails even to do that. A small change to List of dictators highlighting the leaders "currently in power" should suffice. And Raúl? --Zleitzen 04:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I have copied and pasted the explanations to this article, so I believe any remaining opposition is geared towards List of Dictators, not this article. AdamBiswanger1 04:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • FWIW, I was one of the keep voters on the AfD for "List of dictators", and one of the main editors who shaped up the criteria and annotations there. So I think the general list is OK, albeit requiring active monitoring to prevent POV-creep. I simply don't see any advantage to this "digest" of the larger list, since the highlights I added to the larger list make reading the "currently in power" feature quite easy (I used boldface for years "-present"; but some other convention would be fine). LotLE×talk 04:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Merge new info with List of dictators. 24.126.199.129 08:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Just add something on the main list that differentiates current from past. Konman72 09:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge — And mark those in power with a small note at List of dictators Martinp23 10:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep this is a better and more interesting list than List of dictators. Dictators currently in power is a notable list in itself and deserving of a wikipedia article. If there are disputes over whether a particular person in power is a dictator, that can be dealt with as part of the article rather than by deleting the entire article. Merging would diminish this as not only would a notable list be removed but it would be much harder to pick out the current dictators in the larger list. MLA 10:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Further the list of dictators is currently under-populated, I'll try and find time to add some of the many dictators not currently covered (starting with Jerry Rawlings) but that leads me to another reason for keep in that the list of current dictators could do with being a separate list and the existing article is already a very long list despite being incomplete. MLA 10:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of dictators, as demonstrated by its title, is all-inclusive; it is not limited to past dictators. Thus, all dictators, both past and present, should be discussed in that article. If you are worried about organization, perhaps a new section could be created in the original list, but, since the dictators in the list are chronologically organized, with the currently ruling dictators emphasized, I find it difficult to believe that a merger/deletion would create any confusion. -- WGee 04:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added a couple to the under-populated List of dictators and it raised an interesting example to me in the form of Olusegun Obasanjo who is a former dictator but is currently in power. This is interesting and encyclopedic and it something that the article under discussion here could cover where the List of dictators would struggle to. MLA 15:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - reasonable, well cited article that has a specific, encyclopaedic function. I can't imagine any plausible argument for deletion. WilyD 13:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge as per Martinp23. Why can't their just be a few of this wonderful little thing-*- on the List of Dictators page? J Milburn 13:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There is already a List of dictators ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 14:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per MLA Dev920 14:51, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge - List of dictators is already a controversial article (a POV in my opinion). If we can't merge this one into that than Delete it. Reason? Pavel Vozenilek got one above. -- Szvest 14:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC) ^{Wiki me up™}[reply]
• Merge into List of dictators; why not create a "Current" section there? I don't see the point in having a separate article for dictators currently in power. The only effects it can have are:
  • It will merely separate and perhaps double the vandalism,
  • It will serve to confuse readers (they may not realize that ex-dictators have a separate articles, or will search for "List of previous dictators" rather than "List of dictators"). Srose (talk) 15:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge the delete into List of dictators. Mark the merge "Current dictators" in the list page. The map should also be included in the "Current dictators"section--Ed^{talk c E} 16:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as merged. --Vsion 17:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge then delete as suggested above. 204.15.220.162 18:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The above unsigned was by me, logged out. Arkyan 18:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge into List of dictators. —dima ^/sb.tk/ 20:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete first off it is a list, and that violates Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory and the article violates WP:NPOV, plus it is missing Dick Cheney on the list. Displaced Brit 20:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dick Cheney a dictator????--Ed^{talk c E} 21:20, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete Nothing but a disruptive POV fork. 172 | Talk 07:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per 172. --Rory096 15:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. A lot of the entries listed are a matter of opinion. -- Clevelander 16:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge into List of dictators and mark those in power now --Kalsermar 17:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Irredeemably POV. Piccadilly 17:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Detele The same regarding List of dictators. Not because such a list is impossible. It is certainly possible to state some criteria for when a ruler is a dictator and then argue regarding historical persons. But doing this in Wikipedia is original research. Furthermore, the criteria will always be discussed so an article should not have name suggesting that it gives the final word on who is a dictator. Also, similar, highly respected lists already exists and are used by political scientists. See for example the Polity IV Project that for every year lists the degree of democracy and autocracy in every state since 1800. It would be better spend the energy on creating a Wikipedia article on this list.Ultramarine 21:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or mark dictators currently in power in the article "List of Dictators" (so to simplify a search for modern dictators). The map of current dictatorships in the world should be restored.--Húsönd 13:55, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That marking has already been added, thereby making the fork article of no additional organization worth. LotLE×talk 16:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't noticed the marking before. In that case, I change my position to Delete.--Húsönd 21:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Are there any? KleenupKrew 03:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The article is inherently biased. In order for neutrality to exist, we must discuss the controversy surrounding the allegations, including opposing viewpoints; however, this is impossible to do in a list entitled "List of dictators", as the title necessarily and erroneously implies that every leader within it is incontrovertibly a dictator. Let the leaders' policies and actions, which are outlined in their respective articles, serve as a neutral indication of their alleged dictatorial nature; do not try to make unconditional assertions based on the idiosyncratic inferences of editors (i.e., original research). In addition, reigning dictators are already discussed in the List of dictators, thereby making this article superfluous and a POV fork. If organization or "usefulness" is your concern, create a separate section in the original article, at the most; do not create a separate article to surreptitiously promote a POV. Thus, since it is impossible to objectively and incontrovertibly categorize a group of leaders as "dictators", and because this article is a POV fork, List of dictators currently in power should be deleted. -- WGee 03:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, too POV to fix. Ditto List of Dictators, as and when someone puts that up. Hornplease 05:39, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Trust the readers to decide the POV issue. When there is doubt, wikipedia shoule err on the side of keeping an article that obviously is of interest. Removing it would smack of dictatorial censorship --- Skapur 04:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This article adds nothing to List of dictators, but simply duplicates some of the material from it. It isn't censorship to reduce redundancy. -Will Beback 09:18, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I don't see the point in having it when there is a more comprehensive list at "List of Dictators". This duplication isn't necessary. John Smith's 18:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge the content/names not in List of dictators, then Strong Delete. Daniel.Bryant 13:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It is a reasonable, well cited article that has a specific function. A current list is of value and more topical than the complete list. The term "Dictator" is (generally) a question of fact and therefore not POV. Whether the dictator is benign or otherwise is subject to opinion. Matupitu 06:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: User's second edit to Wikipedia was this vote.

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.