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 Nomination withdrawn. The issues with the article have been fixed. Some commenters mentioned merging the article which could be considered on the talk page. (non-admin closure) -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 17:08, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The core ideology of socialism[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested prod. This article should be deleted per WP:NOTESSAY as it is a personal essay. The article’s creator wrote on my talk page “It is not a"n" essay, but a fact, a thinking which is widely understood.” This suggests that the article is written to WP:PROMOTE an new idea which is not allowed. -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 17:15, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you list the specific rule you think that I crossed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 邬山 (talk • contribs)
- See "What Wikipedia is not". In particular, Wikipedia is not a publisher of original research or synthesis, or a soapbox (in other words, it is not vehicle for promotion of particular ideas, subjects, or products). - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:48, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In essence, the article is based on an interpretation of socialism by a particular speaker at Peking University. Delete as a duplicate of socialism. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:48, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see, but what you understood is not the truth, I will find other reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 邬山 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Improvement finished, delation delated, if any, pls contact again, thanks.
One mistake of Mr.Rosoft, I didn't intend to promote of particular ideas, subjects, or products. This page is a shared knowledge for everyone to know what people in China believe in now. As such, please avoid misunderstandings.
Delete per nom Seraphim System ^(talk) 18:46, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. If this is widely understood as the author suggests, then I could see parts of this being merged into Ideology of the Communist Party of China. But the article is too low-quality to be merged right now. --Hirsutism (talk) 20:19, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Edition has been made. Content of Xi's essay has been deleted. 邬山 (talk) 04:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:48, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:48, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is "The core ideology of socialism" to Xi Jinping as the "Three Represents" is to Jiang Zemin and the "Scientific Outlook on Development" is to Hu Jintao? It's my understanding that Chinese Communist leaders are expected to make something like an official contribution to the state ideology, which then would end up getting quite a bit of attention, and would at least be a little helpful for understanding modern China. If so, the article's in bad shape but probably should be expanded and not deleted. - GretLomborg (talk) 14:10, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @GretLomborg: If that is the case, place the article in Draft: space (as it is not ready to be in mainspace in its current form). -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 17:58, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @KAP03: I have replied his request to change the content. Isn't the content now fine to put out there?邬山 (talk) 02:52, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Probably so, I think Xi's choice may hang between "Chinese dream" and this "Core ideology of socialism". And Chinese dream can be a bit too vague to formally announce. Thus I think the ideology has a better chance. And as for "understanding" China, I think it will be helpful, because the first course about politics taught to me in a Chinese university was about explaining and understanding what these words means, in the context of their official statement, although I prefered my own interpretation in the end anyway.邬山 (talk) 23:45, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - possibly some of this content could be a subsection of Ideology of the Communist Party of China? DaveApter (talk) 15:26, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Merge into Ideology of the Communist Party of China or Draftify so @邬山: can work on it some more. My gut feel is that this is a notable topic (for instance, it's mentioned here [1]), but there's not enough content for a standalone article at this time. I do not think this is a case of WP:PROMOTION or WP:NOTESSAY--more like a case where language barriers are getting in the way. I think it would be helpful for someone with both strong Chinese and English language ability to get involved. I also wonder if the standard English translation of this subject is different than "the core ideology of socialism." - GretLomborg (talk) 03:54, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed my vote below. - GretLomborg (talk) 13:50, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

社会主义核心价值观, you can devide these characters into "社会主义" - socialism; "核心" - core; "价值观" - ideology. I think it is one of the most positive and beneficial ideology in Chinese history along with "科学发展观" - scientific development ideology (official wiki page:Scientific Outlook on Development). And sorry that you or some people might be confused by my notions, but I will still speak in my way - plain Chinese translating into plain English. I cannot stand indirect rubbish understanding. The contents by far were translated by me alone, if some people can help with this page, then I will appreciate that. And @GretLomborg:, I am fresh here; so, can you tell me which sub-contents are necessary here?邬山 (talk) 04:41, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@邬山: I am not sure what you mean by sub-contents, but I think the first basic requirement that you have to meet here is to prove that "社会主义核心价值观" is notable. For that you will need to provide at least one or two reliable sources (such as independent newspaper articles or academic writing) that discuss it. Since you say 社会主义核心价值观 is part of the official Chinese Communist Party ideology, it would probably be best to find something independent of the Chinese government, politicians, or state-influenced media, which probably means Western works in this case. It would also help if at least some of these sources were in English, to help English speakers verify the content. It's also important that you describe 社会主义核心价值观 neutrally and not appear to promote an opinion about it. Take a look at the articles for Three Represents and Scientific Outlook on Development for examples, and also read the Wikipedia guidelines WP:N, WP:RS, WP:NPOV, and WP:NOT. - GretLomborg (talk) 06:23, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@邬山: It looks like @Alex Shih: has made some positive improvements to the article to start to address some of the issues. GretLomborg (talk) 06:28, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Comment - I have moved the article to the proper naming, briefly rewrote the lead section and some of the contents. A quick Google search of "Core Socialist Values" returns many prominent results. I am leaning toward merge, but there seems to be enough sources for a standalone also. Alex Shih ^Talk 06:30, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep After Alex Shih's edits yesterday, it is clear that this is a notable subject that has coverage even in Western WP:RS and meets the WP:GNG. All of the WP:NOT issues have been addressed. - GretLomborg (talk) 13:50, 6 July 2017 (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.