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. Nomination withdrawn, no delete votes – PeaceNT 07:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Natalism[edit]

Natalism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)

Non notable neologism, appears to have only one unique occurrence referred to in a small number of blog entries. The topic is covered extensively under Quiverfull already. ALR 16:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw based on CyberAnths commitment to expand beyond dic-def, below. ALR 08:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - links to CBN and the New York Times suggest term may be more widely used. Walton monarchist89 17:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Times is the only unique reference and it appears to have been coined by that author, there is no derivation in that article and the article itslef is over two years old. CBN references the NYT so is not a unique instance. The only other instances which I've seen all refer to the NYT article.ALR 18:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, but fix -- I'm not sure whether there's a more commonly-used term (if there is, then the article should be renamed to it), but discussion of such things as government policies to increase birth-rate (everything from establishing child benefits to Ceaucescu outlawing abortion in Romania) is a very well-established topic... The article does need a better focus -- most of what's in there now duplicates what's on Quiverfull (which is just one very narrow aspect of a whole broad topic).AnonMoos 18:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, merge -- Articles Pronatalism and Natalism should be merged (not sure under which name). AnonMoos 04:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Interesting. I have never encountered Pronatalism. It survived AfD.[1] and Natalism is much better referenced. I think since there can be both pro- and anti- natal stances, they need to both be addressed in Natalism. CyberAnth 04:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting that it survived afd 18 months ago and nothing has happened to it since to make it anything more than a dicdef. Is the same going to happen here?ALR 07:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Natalism" is a policy concern of most nations. Please feel free to go through the list of sources I posted below. There is very much more than that, as well. I intend to expand it too, as time-permits me. After Natalism survives AfD, the first thing I plan to do is request that Pronatalism - now that I know it even exists - be merged into Natalism. CyberAnth 08:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given the lack of activity in Pro-natalism I don't see any need to go through process, looking at AfD guidance you can reasonably redirect it without debate. In terms of going through the sources below, not all of us are cooling our heels in academia and having full EBSCO access. Whilst I'd love the prospect, I do have to work for a living. :)

In any case, if you are going to expand the article to anything other than a poorly referenced dic-def then that's fine. Forgive me if I'm sceptical, there are lots of articles which survive AfD on the basis of keep and improve which never see any development after the fact.

ALR 08:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and expand. Quiverfull is an exclusively evangelical Christian thing. Natalism potentially includes all religions' reasons and secular reasons as well. — coelacan talk — 18:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep A neologism but it is to wide spread and I can see it being notable enough for people to look up to find out what it is.--Dacium 23:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep - please do a little research outside of google before AfD'ing something. Natalism is an ideology, not a neologism, and it has been studied in cultures from time immemorial and a subject in academic papers, including in anthropology and governmental policy, since at least the 1950s. The Quiverfull sub-culture represents only one occurrence of natalist ideas. The article needs some expansion, that's all could readily be expanded into a lengthy article - even a book or dissertation could be wrote - on the subject. CyberAnth 23:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here are just a few of the sources from just one search using the term at EBSCO:
    • Higher Order Nuptial Fertility in New South Wales, 1996: context, process, implications. By: Wilson, Murray G. A.. Australian Geographer, Jul2001, Vol. 32 Issue 2, p181-199, 19p; DOI: 10.1080/00049180120066643; (AN 4896825)
    • Liberation or oppression? radical feminism and in vitro fertilisation. By: Denny, Elaine. Sociology of Health & Illness, Jan1994, Vol. 16 Issue 1, p62-80, 19p; DOI: 10.1111/1467-9566.ep11347010; (AN 11347010)
    • N. S. Khrushchev and the 1944 Soviet family law: politics, reproduction, and language. By: NAKACHI, Mie. East European Politics and Societies, Winter 2006, Vol. 20 Issue 1, p40-68, 29p; (AN 56.3326)
    • Romancing Singapore: When yesterday's success becomes today's challenge. By: Leong, Pauline; Sriramesh, Krishnamurthy. Public Relations Review, Sep2006, Vol. 32 Issue 3, p246-253, 8p; DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.05.011; (AN 22010816)
    • Arab Political Demography: Volume One: Population Growth and Natalist Policies. By: Yount, Kathryn M.. International Journal of Middle East Studies, Aug2006, Vol. 38 Issue 3, p476-478, 3p; DOI: 10.1017/S0020743806383201; (AN 22402655)
    • The Reproductive Effects of Family Planning Programs in Rural Ghana: Analysis by Gender. By: Benefo, Kofi D.; Pillai, Vijayan K.. Journal of Asian & African Studies (00219096), Dec2005, Vol. 40 Issue 6, p463-477, 15p, 5 charts; DOI: 10.1177/0021909605059516; (AN 19242052)
    • From Anti-Natalist to Ultra-Conservative: Restricting Reproductive Choice in Peru. By: Coe, Anna-Britt. Reproductive Health Matters, Nov2004, Vol. 12 Issue 24, p56-69, 14p; DOI: 10.1016/S0968-8080(04)24139-8; (AN 14870701)
    • Creating a 'socialist way of life': family and reproduction policies in Bulgaria, 1944-1989. By: Brunnbauer, Ulf; Taylor, Karin. Continuity & Change, Aug2004, Vol. 19 Issue 2, p283-312, 30p, 6 charts; DOI: 10.1017/S0268416004005004; (AN 15233231)
    • Polygamy, disrupted reproduction, and the state: Malian migrants in Paris, France. By: Sargent, Carolyn; Cordell, Dennis. Social Science & Medicine, May2003, Vol. 56 Issue 9, p1961, 12p; DOI: 10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00216-2; (AN 9288081)

CyberAnth 01:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• keep There is obviously support for the use of the term, and I see no basis to delete. DGG 17:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the commenters above. Yamaguchi先生 00:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.