Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ingsoc

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 redirect to Political geography of Nineteen Eighty-Four. Clear consensus to redirect here, albeit some slight disagreement as to where. I've picked this target, but anyone can feel free to change it at their editorial desire. If anybody wishes to merge the content to a suitable destination, it is still available in the history behind the redirect. Daniel (talk) 05:08, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ingsoc

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

One moe follow up to the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inner Party (3rd nomination). PROD was declined, so here we go. This is pure plot summary, the only two citations are to the book. The article contains no discussion of the significance of this concept outside the book, and in my WP:BEFORE I didn't see anything outside passing mentions in the form of plot summaries. For the record, I reviewed the academic articles which appear to discuss this, and sadly, I came to the conclusion that they do not do so (despite mentioning this term in the title). [1] just uses this term few times as a metaphor or a literary synonym to communism, and mostly focuses on United States, using it (or rather, the Newspeak as an excuse to invent(?) new neologisms (the terms Amcap, Amerigood, and Marketspeak) which it discusses in more detail. [2] is even worse, the term is used twice in the article in passing, the author just took the quote from the book for their paper to make it catchy (as they note, "Ingsoc in relation to chess" is the title of an in-universe paper which they thought would be fitting for their real world paper too...). This book chapter which also uses Ingsoc in its name, likewise doesn't seem to contain any in-depth discussion of the concept. [3] contains a single sentence about how Ingsoc is similar to some modern bureaucratic governments... Sigh. In summary, the topic does not seem to have any in-depth analysis, just plot summaries and obvious "sky is blue" passing comments that IngSoc is a metaphor for extreme bureaucratic communism. Such a one sentence can and should exist in our main article on Nineteen Eighty-four, but there is no need for a stand-alone plot summary about this. No scholar has analyzed the term, although a few used it in passing as a nice catchy term here and there (which probably makes it worthy of inclusion in the Wikitionary, but not on Wikipedia - there is really nothing to be done here, it's DICTDEF expandable to some more plot summary). On that note, the existing article also doesn't contain much (even ORish) discussion of this topic, as most of the text here is not about IngSoc but about the sem0related "Oceanian social-class system", a topic that is otherwise actually more notable than IngSoc, but there is nothing to rescue (split) here, as it is all unreferenced plot and OR. As for redirecting this, just a generic redirect to the main article should suffice, no section discusses this concept in any detail, but we should have a blue link. Hence I recommend to redirect this term to Nineteen_Eighty-Four. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:53, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:53, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:53, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:56, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably redirect but to Political geography of Nineteen Eighty-Four (unless that article is going to be AFDed as well). Part of the point is that the name of the ideology doesn't really matter. Whether it is the "Ingsoc" of Oceania, "Neo-Bolshevism" of Euarasia, or "Obliteration of the Self" of Eastasia, all of them are totalitarian superstates in perpetual war. Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:53, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Sjakkalle, A quick glance at the "political geography..." suggests that the article is probably notable, so at least I am not intending to AfD it anytime soon. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:23, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete then redirect Redirect to Political geography of Nineteen Eighty-Four or similar. Ingsoc is notable, however, it always seems to be used as a synonym for "1984" or "Big Brother", both of which are far more notable. Dushan Jugum (talk) 00:48, 7 July 2021 (UTC).[reply]
Weak keep - I believe we should discuss totalitarian regimes, be they real or fictional, given Wikipedia's educational purpose. - GizzyCatBella🍁 05:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge→Nineteen Eighty-Four I can agree a lot of this is plot summary, which is why I think it's relevant to Nineteen Eighty-Four. A lot of the material from this article could be used to create a new sub-section there. ––FORMALDUDE^(talk) 04:14, 14 July 2021 (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.