952:
with Russia and the West and not "original research" or a self-made hypothesis or exaggeration, they represent an enormous and significant shift in the scope of relations between the involved parties and global politics as a whole. This is too big to be simply dismissed. The two
Ukraine crises, the georgia conflict, the Syrian civil war's escalation into a proxy confict, all of these things knit together into a new and concrete narrative of a new Russian standoff against the Western world, albeit in entirely different conditions to the Cold War. Resultantly, the media have thrown this term about enormously and it is thus not a fictional commentary. To delete this page, or to redirect it to something else where the subject is squashed in, is to seriously under-represent and dismiss a topic which is making global headlines on a near daily basis. Perhaps a title change debate is in order, why not? I understand back when I wrote this I may have jumped the gun a bit. Nonetheless I stand by the fact it is notable of coverage, to consider deleting it? don't be daft.
767:- I think the events fit under other articles, e.g. syria, ukraine, etcetera; and the overall strategy is just the policy of Putin. I do not see that there is an ongoing event equivqalent to the iron curtain or berlin wall of decades-long duration, nor does this seem to be overall anything other than logical assertion of power on the borders. Nasty maybe, but not an ideological or longstanding thing and not near the level of Cold War where Korea and Vietnam were just sideparts of it. Mostly,
463:— impossible to see any clear valid reason for deletion in highly moot and abstruse verbose "statements" (are we in a court hearing here?) by Kirby. I would also recommend that he speak for oneself rather than for "Many users" and "along with most" -- utterly preposterous and presumptuous claims. His views on the validity of the term (referenced by numerous sources) is his personal opinion that carries no weight.
726:
I'm saying is that I do see an option to keep an article at the title "Cold War II", just not the current one. I think the lazy route might be to rename the article, and have a disambiguation page here, but better to try to move what can be used on other articles to those articles. So too I agree with what
725:
I see what you're saying, that its an argument to avoid, the trouble is that its two separate issues. The term is notable, like you said it could be a subarticle, certainly its own section on another article, and separately the text of the article is sourced but not actually related to the term. What
951:
as the original creator of the article, I am willing to concede ground and room for significant change concerning the article itself but I feel outright deleting it would overstep the mark and remove a lot of relevant content concerning the focus of international relations on wikipedia. These events
256:
this is no new Cold War!! Way too soon to call it that and therefore it safe to believe it's time for a support or oppose vote to either keep the article or delete it! Voting to move or
Redirect the article with or to another one is also on the table for voting! None of the less, a vote must be held
238:
2. Civilian travel is allowed in all of the following countries I have listed, China and Russia except for Iran and the fact that neither side has for the most part shut itself off from one another I.E. like with the Iron curtain and the Berlin Wall and instead we allow media from both sides to come
246:
said before me, The Cold War took place in a bipolar world, with the United States and the Soviet Union as the two undisputed superpowers competing for economic, ideological, military, and diplomatic influence on multiple continents and, at times, veering very close to direct war with one another.
234:
1. We still have much better diplomatic relations with China, Russia and Iran as opposed to the actual Cold War where civilian travel to these countries were prohibited and due to NATO and the West and the
Communists being at each others throats for the most part.
660:
its severely reduced in scope. When we created the article last year, it was about the term "Cold War II", which is all it should stick to. The problem is we have better places for much of the historic information that is on the article now, mainly the article
850:
Apart from what i have said, i would like to note that i find the position of those questioning the title and the very existence of this article quite hypocritical in view of the fact that it had been recently decided (overlooked by me) that the article
250:
4. This article essentially covers
Vladimir Putin's foreign policy and international reactions to it. As it stands, it simply does not make a strong case for the use of the term, and it might be better served with another title for the time being.
855:
be kept! All the info in that article is duplication; and the heading is a mere invention! And it is not that it is simply not sourced, but, more importantly, it presumes the existence of something that is highly disputable too! (See
606:, but it actually seems to be a pretty reasonable article. I therefore lean keep, though I am open to the notion that renaming and even merges are possible says forwards AFD doesn't seem like a very good venue for that discussion.
788:- the term is extensively used. It's just that this article only had sources describing it as an ongoing event. Therefore, I've now added sources to its definition that describe it as a possible (or very unlikely) future event.
404:
You already proposed the article for deletion. You are attempting to !vote twice. I have struck your second one. Additionally, a World War III would certainly be different than a Cold War II, so that argument is invalid.
365:
hampers his argument further! I will give him credit for gathering sources, but there are an equal amount of news outlets and articles from them that talk about the world heading toward WWIII rather than a Second Cold
501:
Most users did not !vote that the article should be merged. Hollth was ambivalent. Kingofaces43, Orser67 and I suggested it should be renamed. Volunteer Marek and
Markbassett !voted that it should be merged. —
857:
174:
209:
disputed and has been subject to massive debate and controversy within
Knowledge (XXG) and especially on the talk page of the article for over a year now. The latest debate was on the article's talkpage:
665:. The number of references and reliability of the sourcing shouldn't matter if the material isn't specifically referencing the term "Cold War II". We can reference what Francis Fukuyama said in 1992 in
821:
Finally, just because I expressed this article to be deleted on the talk page of the article itself and opened up this AFD debate does not disqualify or render my Delete vote null in anyway! Regards!
354:
made is an invalid one! What was just said by him with all due respect only legitimatizes that this article it should either be deleted altogether or merged into another article such as these two:
239:
in shows that The United States and Russia are more along the lines of allies with their friendship as of current dangling by a thread rather than bitter enemies like back in 1946-1989!
127:
1023:, the original creator of the article, with all due respect, you did indeed jump the gun with the title of the Article itself! However, I still stand firm with my position on the
283:), so it doesn't matter whether or not it really is another Cold War, it only matters that the topic has been discussed in broad detail. The article should make it clear what the
443:
771:
where this is the WP:COMMONNAME in use rather than a catchy WP:NEO that some folks use. I think merger the bits elsewhere and delete this article is the best course.
426:
168:
291:
261:
I have stated my argument on why it should be deleted already and I essentially speak for a great deal of users who support the deletion of this article! Regards!
921:
discussing the concept of a second Cold War (why it's happening, why it's not happening, why it's likely to happen, etc) that it meets the notability guidelines.
551:
This is not based on !votes but arguments citing policy. You have not demonstrated a valid reason to delete the article and it's been shown the article meets the
852:
380:
371:
303:
390:
That said, I believe that this article is moot and should be deleted! Hopefully others will come here and way in their positions on this debate!
134:
377:
696:
228:
I have only heard a few news sources call this a new cold war, but this is far from a frozen conflict and that's what most are saying.
670:
662:
374:
225:
Many users, myself included have stated that this article in itself is moot and way too soon and should either be deleted altogether!
287:
state and the controversy of whether or not there is a second Cold War. A disagreement over the title is also not cause for deletion.
362:. The fact that some of his sources, at least one of them even talks about the world not going toward a Cold War, but World War III:
17:
480:
One of the most ridiculous deletion proposals I've ever seen, based entirely on one user's original research and personal opinion.
318:
1032:
793:
636:
355:
294:
215:
100:
95:
914:
104:
189:
309:
156:
87:
1096:
214:. There, most of the users expressed that the title was not accurate and should be merged into another article such as
40:
789:
886:
737:
674:
306:
585:
Clearly meets the general notability guidelines. Over 100 refs. I'm not sure what policy would justify removal.
669:, but he wasn't talking about Cold War II. Move/incorporate information into the many "See also" articles like
639:
but that article is bursting at the seams and has already quite rightly spawned a number of subarticles. Not a
917:
etc). There are many things that are not happening or do not exist that have articles on WP. There are enough
383:
312:
150:
590:
700:
1059:
841:
485:
297:
1092:
1028:
901:
882:
776:
745:
740:) said about merging being an option, I just think that Delete gives us the best a chance to do that.--
682:
448:
431:
363:
359:
315:
300:
219:
146:
36:
1077:
1063:
1044:
1005:
986:
961:
933:
890:
869:
845:
830:
797:
780:
753:
712:
690:
652:
615:
594:
567:
539:
533:
I didn't say that, although I don't see how something this big could be merged into another article. —
528:
508:
489:
472:
452:
435:
417:
399:
331:
279:- meets GNG. Something does not have to exist or be proved true to have a Knowledge (XXG) article (see
270:
69:
772:
977:- I concur. I found this article well sourced and informative. The title is somehow suspect, though.
519:
So you don't believe that it should be merged with another article! Le'ts wait till others get here!
67:
906:
640:
196:
182:
996:
The name of this article is clearly unacceptable given that this is a contested concept, at best.
1040:
826:
708:
648:
586:
524:
395:
266:
1020:
953:
1055:
865:
837:
481:
468:
288:
280:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1091:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
59:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1001:
808:
741:
678:
534:
503:
211:
91:
803:
BTW everyone! There is the vote option of
Redirect on the table! Just pointing that out to
632:
628:
603:
552:
982:
922:
556:
406:
344:
320:
243:
64:
918:
284:
162:
53:
699:, you cannot say that it should be deleted unless it is fixed up. Nor is a lousy title (
957:
731:
611:
631:, and may well be renamed in due course, but that does not alter the fact that passes
1036:
822:
704:
644:
546:
520:
391:
262:
861:
499:"most of the users expressed that the title was not accurate and should be merged".
464:
231:
Here are the reasons why I along with most would see this as not another Cold War:
121:
818:
will change his position from Keep to
Redirect, but I do hope he reconsiders! :)
1016:
997:
83:
75:
978:
815:
804:
727:
624:
607:
881:: This "second cold war" is not happening, so perhaps this is WP:Crystal?
858:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Russia-Syria-Iran-Iraq
Coalition
602:
That *is* a terrible title, and I expected the article to be terrible
703:) a reason for deletion. Either the subject is notable or it isn't.
1085:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1054:
is what needs to happen here. The title is highly questionable.
811:
and other users who will be participating in this debate!
117:
113:
109:
836:
Yes, it does. For fuck's sake, read the instructions.
181:
195:
677:, or delete it and redirect to either of those.--
909:generally refers to events and things like that (
56:questions is referred to the article talk page.
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1099:). No further edits should be made to this page.
975:Keep and instead launch a renaming discussion
949:Keep and instead launch a renaming discussion
444:list of Military-related deletion discussions
8:
442:Note: This debate has been included in the
425:Note: This debate has been included in the
427:list of Events-related deletion discussions
212:Talk:Cold_War_II#RfC:_Accuracy_of_the_title
635:. It could be considered a subarticle of
441:
424:
52:. There is a clear consensus to keep. The
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
242:3. As another user by the name of
24:
385:. That's just to list, but a few!
1033:Foreign Policy of Vladimir Putin
853:Russia–Syria–Iran–Iraq Coalition
637:Foreign policy of Vladimir Putin
356:Foreign policy of Vladimir Putin
216:Foreign policy of Vladimir Putin
915:Planned Battle of Mosul (2015)
671:Russia–United States relations
663:Russia–United States relations
643:, so no grounds for deletion.
205:As it stands, this article is
1:
1078:23:11, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
1064:22:53, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
673:and the ever in need of work
627:that the title is a terrible
343:I digress! The argument that
70:01:00, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
1045:08:48, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
1015:I could not agree more with
1006:20:23, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
987:16:06, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
962:07:41, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
934:18:58, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
891:17:41, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
870:14:46, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
846:07:14, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
831:23:35, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
798:14:10, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
781:23:00, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
754:15:59, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
713:08:42, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
691:22:36, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
653:20:33, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
616:17:09, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
595:16:40, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
568:17:02, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
540:15:59, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
529:15:49, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
509:15:45, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
490:15:36, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
473:15:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
453:14:56, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
436:14:56, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
418:14:46, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
400:14:36, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
332:13:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
271:10:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
1116:
697:WP:Deletion is not cleanup
1088:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
1073:—appears to meet GNG.--
769:just show me the cites
1029:NATO-Russia relations
911:Fast & Furious 12
675:NATO–Russia relations
360:NATO-Russia relations
220:NATO-Russia relations
814:I am not sure if
751:
688:
455:
438:
281:Loch Ness Monster
63:
60:non-admin closure
1107:
1090:
1076:
1052:Keep and re-name
1019:on this one! To
930:
905:
902:RailwayScientist
883:RailwayScientist
790:Mikael Häggström
749:
686:
564:
550:
537:
506:
451:
434:
414:
352:
328:
200:
199:
185:
137:
125:
107:
57:
34:
1115:
1114:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1097:deletion review
1086:
1074:
923:
899:
748:
685:
557:
544:
535:
504:
447:
430:
407:
345:
321:
142:
133:
98:
82:
79:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1113:
1111:
1102:
1101:
1081:
1080:
1067:
1066:
1060:crack... thump
1048:
1047:
1009:
1008:
990:
989:
971:
970:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
964:
939:
938:
937:
936:
894:
893:
875:
874:
873:
872:
801:
800:
783:
761:
760:
759:
758:
757:
756:
746:
718:
717:
716:
715:
683:
667:End of History
655:
618:
597:
579:
578:
577:
576:
575:
574:
573:
572:
571:
570:
512:
511:
500:
493:
492:
475:
457:
456:
439:
422:
421:
420:
387:
386:
368:
367:
335:
334:
207:overwhelmingly
203:
202:
139:
78:
73:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1112:
1100:
1098:
1094:
1089:
1083:
1082:
1079:
1072:
1069:
1068:
1065:
1061:
1057:
1053:
1050:
1049:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1011:
1010:
1007:
1003:
999:
995:
992:
991:
988:
984:
980:
976:
973:
972:
963:
959:
955:
950:
947:
946:
945:
944:
943:
942:
941:
940:
935:
931:
929:
928:
920:
916:
912:
908:
903:
898:
897:
896:
895:
892:
888:
884:
880:
877:
876:
871:
867:
863:
859:
854:
849:
848:
847:
843:
839:
835:
834:
833:
832:
828:
824:
819:
817:
812:
810:
806:
799:
795:
791:
787:
784:
782:
778:
774:
770:
766:
763:
762:
755:
752:
743:
739:
736:
733:
729:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
719:
714:
710:
706:
702:
701:WP:LOUSYTITLE
698:
694:
693:
692:
689:
680:
676:
672:
668:
664:
659:
658:Delete unless
656:
654:
650:
646:
642:
638:
634:
630:
626:
622:
619:
617:
613:
609:
605:
601:
598:
596:
592:
588:
587:Capitalismojo
584:
581:
580:
569:
565:
563:
562:
554:
548:
543:
542:
541:
538:
532:
531:
530:
526:
522:
518:
517:
516:
515:
514:
513:
510:
507:
498:
495:
494:
491:
487:
483:
479:
476:
474:
470:
466:
462:
459:
458:
454:
450:
449:North America
445:
440:
437:
433:
432:North America
428:
423:
419:
415:
413:
412:
403:
402:
401:
397:
393:
389:
388:
384:
381:
378:
375:
372:
370:
369:
364:
361:
357:
353:
351:
350:
342:
341:
337:
336:
333:
329:
327:
326:
319:
316:
313:
310:
307:
304:
301:
298:
295:
292:
289:
286:
282:
278:
275:
274:
273:
272:
268:
264:
259:
258:
252:
248:
245:
240:
236:
232:
229:
226:
223:
221:
217:
213:
208:
198:
194:
191:
188:
184:
180:
176:
173:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
148:
145:
144:Find sources:
140:
136:
132:
129:
123:
119:
115:
111:
106:
102:
97:
93:
89:
85:
81:
80:
77:
74:
72:
71:
68:
66:
61:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1087:
1084:
1070:
1056:Peacemaker67
1051:
1024:
1012:
993:
974:
948:
926:
925:
910:
878:
838:Joefromrandb
820:
813:
802:
785:
768:
764:
734:
666:
657:
620:
599:
582:
560:
559:
496:
482:Joefromrandb
477:
460:
410:
409:
348:
347:
339:
338:
324:
323:
276:
260:
255:
253:
249:
241:
237:
233:
230:
227:
224:
206:
204:
192:
186:
178:
171:
165:
159:
153:
143:
130:
49:
47:
31:
28:
1075:Surv1v4l1st
773:Markbassett
623:Agree with
254:That said,
169:free images
84:Cold War II
76:Cold War II
907:WP:CRYSTAL
641:WP:POVFORK
555:required.
244:Kdowns1453
65:Sam Sailor
1093:talk page
497:Not True:
257:on this!!
37:talk page
1095:or in a
1025:Redirect
927:Мандичка
738:contribs
705:Hawkeye7
645:Hawkeye7
561:Мандичка
547:Keeby101
411:Мандичка
349:Мандичка
325:Мандичка
218:or even
128:View log
39:or in a
1031:and/or
1013:Comment
994:Comment
879:Comment
862:Axxxion
809:Patrick
742:Patrick
679:Patrick
465:Axxxion
175:WP refs
163:scholar
101:protect
96:history
1017:Nick-D
998:Nick-D
765:Delete
633:WP:GNG
629:WP:NEO
604:WP:NEO
553:WP:GNG
340:Delete
147:Google
105:delete
1037:Kirby
979:Zezen
919:WP:RS
823:Kirby
521:Kirby
392:Kirby
285:WP:RS
263:Kirby
222:.
190:JSTOR
151:books
135:Stats
122:views
114:watch
110:links
54:WP:AT
16:<
1071:Keep
1041:talk
1021:TF92
1002:talk
983:talk
958:talk
954:TF92
887:talk
866:talk
842:talk
827:talk
816:Artw
805:Artw
794:talk
786:Keep
777:talk
732:talk
728:Artw
709:talk
695:Per
649:talk
625:Artw
621:Keep
612:talk
608:Artw
600:Keep
591:talk
583:Keep
536:Ríco
525:talk
505:Ríco
486:talk
478:Keep
469:talk
461:Keep
396:talk
366:War.
277:Keep
267:talk
183:FENS
157:news
118:logs
92:talk
88:edit
50:keep
1027:to
932:😜
566:😜
416:😜
358:or
330:😜
197:TWL
126:– (
1062:)
1043:)
1035:.
1004:)
985:)
960:)
913:,
889:)
868:)
860:)
844:)
829:)
796:)
779:)
744:,
711:)
681:,
651:)
614:)
593:)
527:)
488:)
471:)
446:.
429:.
398:)
382:,
379:,
376:,
373:,
317:,
314:,
311:,
308:,
305:,
302:,
299:,
296:,
293:,
290:,
269:)
177:)
120:|
116:|
112:|
108:|
103:|
99:|
94:|
90:|
1058:(
1039:(
1000:(
981:(
956:(
924:—
904::
900:@
885:(
864:(
840:(
825:(
807:,
792:(
775:(
750:Ѻ
747:o
735:·
730:(
707:(
687:Ѻ
684:o
647:(
610:(
589:(
558:—
549::
545:@
523:(
484:(
467:(
408:—
394:(
346:—
322:—
265:(
201:)
193:·
187:·
179:·
172:·
166:·
160:·
154:·
149:(
141:(
138:)
131:·
124:)
86:(
62:)
58:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.