Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zionist entity

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 delete‎. I see a rough consensus that this article should be deleted. If an editor wants to create a Redirect from this page title, feel free. If anyone objects, they can take it to WP:RFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:46, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zionist entity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

The article is a polemic attack on the supposed ideological enemies of the state of Israel. Right from its very beginning it dispenses with any cloak of WP:NPOV and goes straight to attacking all Arabs, Muslims and left-wingers as being enemies of Israel. This sort of POV pushing has no place on Wikipedia as it offers no encyclopaedic value at all. This requires WP:TNT TarnishedPath^talk 07:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Israel, and Palestine. TarnishedPath^talk 07:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Note that deletion is not cleanup. Curbon7 (talk) 08:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Middle East. TarnishedPath^talk 09:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Redirect to Legitimacy of the State of Israel#Rhetoric of delegitimization or something of sorts. It's a nickname for Israel used by some Arabs and Muslims. Not notable per se yet in existence. gidonb (talk) 00:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete due to WP:NPOV. Not much can be here other than TNT. With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 12:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I think is a real and notable term widely used even today by various middle eastern media outlets and politicians, just listen to a recent Nasrallah or Khamenei speech. Like the article references show, the term been in use for decades. For reference, Wikipedia does have pages for various epithets of certain countries, for example Great Satan, Banana Republic, Hermit Kingdom, or Sick Man of Europe. Also, there are several pages for epithets directed towards ethnicities, for example Yankee, Kraut, and Jap. If the problem is that a the article is biased, it would be better to rewrite it from a more NPOV rather than outright deleting it. AuburnDistrict (talk) 17:06, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The only problem I see with the lead is that someone recently added left-wingers to the list without proper citations. There's currently four different citations, none of which actually state that left-wingers use this term. Some surely might do so but it would require a better reference, rather than an article that generally discusses left-wing opposition to Zionism. AuburnDistrict (talk) 17:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete To begin, from the first sentence of the article:Zionist entity (Arabic: الكيان الصهيوني, al-kiyān al-Sohyūniyy), Zionist regime (Persian: رژیم صهیونیستی, rezhim-e Sahyonisti), and Zionist enemy are interchangeable pejorative terms used predominantly by Arabs, Muslims and left-wingers in reference to the State of Israel. According to what reliable source are these three distinct phrases in different languagesinterchangeable? The whole article is an OR POV mess. Support TNT. إيان (talk) 05:22, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless the editor in question can provide page numbers for all book sources (those I controlled, like Cohen's wonderful book or Suleiman's 2011 book p.131) does mention one term but he is used in a sentence re terminological interchangeability which I can find no corroboration for) Nishidani (talk) 06:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A bunch of the sources I looked at only mentioned the term in passing if at all, so there's definitely WP:OR going on. The article has a definite problem with over-sourcing and this appears to stem from an attempt to overcompensate for the aforementioned fact. However for me the more glaring issue is the WP:NPOV mess that needs WP:TNT. TarnishedPath^talk 07:20, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless can be completely rewritten, entirely non-neutral. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 20:09, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment pretty much the entire article is sourced to citations that are books where the page number is missing. This makes the entire existing article difficult to verify. Its not clear what exactly the sources are referring to and whether there is original research going on or not.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 05:17, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Notability doesn't depend on what is currently written in the article, and it doesn't seem beyond repair. There is plenty of direct and in-depth discussion of the terms "Zionist Entity" and "Zionist Regime" in WP:RS, including academic discourse directly on this topic, as anyone who takes a moment to search will see. For example, [1] [2] [3] [4] Marokwitz (talk) 08:02, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Your argument doesn't refute that the article qualifies for WP:TNT. TarnishedPath^talk 10:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I didn't see any argument why it is so hopelessly bad that WP:TNT is the only option. TNT is always the last resort. The TNT essay explains that you need to show that the article's content is entirely useless (including all the versions in history). Marokwitz (talk) 19:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or redirect to Israel. The term has enough coverage in academic journals for it to meet WP:GNG. If the article is considered so subpar as to merit WP:TNT, then I would support a redirect to Israel. MarioGom (talk) 14:51, 23 January 2024 (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.