475:. However, it is not a synonym for this, nor should it be a simple redirect to this. It is a concrete ideology with a vast published literature that should be seven miles over General Notability Guidelines, which call for multiple, independent, reliable, published sources. Somehow the emphasis here is on how crappy and unnecessary and duplicative this piece is. That's neither here nor there. The title is right, the subject is encyclopedic — as even a cursory search of published literature will indicate — and this should be closed a keep for now. I gay-ron-tee that this piece will not stay this way for very long, it has been one that I've been thinking about for quite some time but there are some big research needs that need to be fulfilled before it can be done right, as opposed to as an original essay.
279:- I've noticed that this basic concept has been missing from WP for a while but haven't taken it on yet due to the difficulty of writing the piece without engaging in so-called "original research," quote unquote. This is a correct title for the piece. This is an encyclopedic topic. It's a bad early effort here. A simple Google search for the term will demonstrate the pervasiveness of the concept. When I eventually go after it, I'll probably start with the concept of "100% Americanism" and contrast Americanism with Bolshevism, which was a common published juxtaposition of ideological concepts when the term launched in the early 20th Century. Like I say, this is a tough piece and it has been obviously missing from WP for quite some time; keep and improve through the normal editing process.
390:(n.d., circa 1919). And so on. There is a huge radical literature and a huge patriotic literature dealing with the ideological concept. A WorldCat search of "Americanism" in book titles returns 3,402 books — obviously some duplicates, but there are probably about 1500 books and pamphlets, conservatively, using the word in the title. And yes, many or most of them are dealing with more or less the same ideological concept.
48:. There is next to nothing refuting the claim that this is a notable topic in light of the sources presented, which take it beyond a dictionary term. Also, no-one has established that the stub is problematic, as opposed to merely inadequate. Those arguing for a redirect or a merge have not established that "Americanism" is the same as the proposed target (eg "American nationalism"). The consensus is to keep.
236:
440:? This splintering of different aspects of the same topic makes it difficult for searchers to find all the information on these closely related topics when one or two pages and several redirects could solve the problem. (I say this as a librarian. This is partially a problem of needing controlled vocabulary.)
606:
493:
article, which is little more than a dictionary entry, can be merged into this one instead because I stand by the idea that there are too many articles on different facets of the same subject. The point of an encyclopedia is to provide useful and easily locatable information to interested searchers.
361:
As for myself, I'm not gonna do work on this one under the gun, this is probably a three day writing project to get it more or less right. This is not the
Article Improvement Workshop in any event. The term apparently was popularized by Teddy Roosevelt in a book by the same name, published in 1915 —
255:
Yeah. Anything of value can easily be incorporated into another article rather than leaving it as a stub which, quite frankly, lacks in substance. I've never heard or read this word used in this manner. Americanism generally refers to a word or phrase originating in the U.S. Or this article could be
558:
as the basis for an article. As usual, Carrite has the right approach: use an inadequate stub as a basis for building. The more complicated the meaning, the greater the potential for an article explaining the ramifications and the usages, To throw articles out as inadequate would have doomed
427:
If it can actually be improved and sourced, that would be great. The point I'm trying to make though is that it seems to be a three sentence rehash of information available in several other articles. It's possible for an idea to exist under different names. Is this concept unique enough from
213:
559:
Knowledge (XXG) from the beginning. There is no policy basis for deletion. What we remove are only those inadequate articles which are unexpandable because there is shown to be an absence of information for expanding them--and this is far from it.
619:
154:
362:
if someone wants to start digging, that's the era to start looking. The term went out of vogue at the end of the 1950s; Billy Graham wrote a work on the topic in 1956. For a recent book, see David
Galernter,
297:
494:
Going beyond that it should also be easy to browse through relevant, related information. That's why consolidation of information (where applicable) and controlled vocabulary are so important.
542:. The word has been used, but with many disparate meanings. I don't believe it is possible to write an article on the wordl, because essentially that's all it is (a word with many definitions,
680:
This might be a small article,but a major edit to this article can make it better.Remember,it is always better to improve a article rather than deleting it for not being good enough.
148:
115:
317:
185:
This is barely an article and it lacks any references or sources. If there's anything of substance in the two or three sentences it contains they can be added to
370:(University of North Carolina Press, 2008). If I'm starting to work, I've got those in front of me from the get-go. Here's a few more: David Jayne Hill,
88:
83:
92:
763:! Moreover this ideology is far from unique to America. You can substitute "America" with many other countries, so what's so special about this? --
75:
613:
169:
339:
sources under "100 % Americanism", but I'm not sure they're reliable. Anyone who wants to take a crack at rescuing or incubating this,
136:
578:
Knowledge (XXG) is not a dictionary. The fact that the term has been used to refer to different things does not justify an article.
17:
633:
626:
456:
130:
525:
this one, and I'll add the usual suspect tags to see if someone wants to fix it. Otherwise, incubation may be in order.
790:
126:
36:
775:
741:
717:
689:
672:
649:
587:
570:
550:
534:
503:
484:
460:
420:
399:
352:
329:
309:
288:
269:
248:
198:
79:
57:
736:
645:
176:
583:
789:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
471:
This is a legitimate encyclopedic subject in its own right. It should probably, in final form, be a subpage of
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
204:
713:
437:
489:
If it can be turned into a legitimate article, that's fine. As it stands it's next to worthless. Maybe the
444:
668:
71:
63:
260:
article. I'm just saying, there seem to be several articles saying the same thing under different names.
728:
685:
641:
142:
53:
760:
750:
705:
698:
660:
579:
472:
429:
416:
186:
597:- The topic appears to have been addressed in several sources. I've added these two to the article:
495:
448:
261:
190:
162:
543:
709:
499:
452:
265:
218:
194:
411:
With what, I'm not sure exactly. This just seems to be a rephrase of "American
Patriotism". --
664:
630:
623:
610:
530:
480:
395:
348:
325:
305:
284:
244:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
340:
681:
49:
547:
412:
620:"Twentieth-century Americanism: identity and ideology in Depression-era leftist fiction."
771:
725:. Just provide some good references, and worry about expansion later. A stub is fine.
566:
519:
490:
433:
257:
223:
526:
476:
391:
344:
321:
301:
280:
240:
109:
755:
764:
228:
561:
231:. All of the other news articles I've found online about it refer to
783:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
298:
list of United States of
America-related deletion discussions
753:. It is really a manifestation of nationalism or actually a
607:"Americanism: new perspectives on the history of an ideal."
366:(Doubleday) or Michael Kazin and Joseph Anthony McCartin,
368:
Americanism : new perspectives on the history of an ideal
514:
Carrite, I'm going with your argument; I would favor a
105:
101:
97:
697:
if the concept can be established to be distinct from
161:
175:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
793:). No further edits should be made to this page.
436:to merit its own entry? Could it be merged with
318:list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions
364:Americanism: The Fourth Great Western Religion
8:
605:Kazin, Michael; McCartin, Joseph A. (2006.)
316:Note: This debate has been included in the
296:Note: This debate has been included in the
335:You know, you are right; there are lots of
315:
295:
609:The University of North Carolina Press.
221:a reliable source. John Pilger in the
217:has used the term, but I don't believe
701:using reliable sources. If it cannot,
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
376:Americanism and Social Democracy
546:), and not an actual ideology.
386:(1920), Woodrow Wilson et al.
1:
776:12:18, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
742:16:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
718:18:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
690:15:03, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
58:05:45, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
673:06:33, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
650:02:21, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
588:01:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
571:00:29, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
551:18:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
535:21:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
504:19:34, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
485:18:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
461:13:33, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
421:12:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
400:04:02, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
378:(1918), Warren G. Harding,
353:00:46, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
330:22:48, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
310:22:48, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
289:22:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
270:17:29, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
249:17:13, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
199:16:57, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
810:
618:Yerkes, Andrew C. (2005.)
384:Americanism and Bolshevism
786:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
438:American exceptionalism
372:Americanism: What It Is
237:Your results may differ
256:incorporated into the
72:Americanism (ideology)
64:Americanism (ideology)
374:(1916), John Spargo,
761:American nationalism
751:American nationalism
699:American nationalism
661:American nationalism
473:American nationalism
430:American nationalism
382:(1920), Ole Hanson,
187:American Nationalism
44:The result was
774:
740:
614:978-0-8078-3010-9
464:
447:comment added by
332:
312:
801:
788:
770:
739:
733:
726:
723:Conditional Keep
642:Northamerica1000
463:
441:
214:Washington Times
180:
179:
165:
113:
95:
34:
809:
808:
804:
803:
802:
800:
799:
798:
797:
791:deletion review
784:
729:
727:
442:
235:-Americanism.
122:
86:
70:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
807:
805:
796:
795:
779:
778:
747:Redirect/merge
744:
720:
692:
675:
653:
652:
639:
638:
637:
636:
616:
600:
599:
598:
591:
590:
573:
553:
537:
511:
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
466:
465:
424:
423:
405:
404:
403:
402:
356:
355:
341:go right ahead
333:
313:
292:
291:
273:
272:
252:
251:
229:wrote about it
183:
182:
119:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
806:
794:
792:
787:
781:
780:
777:
773:
768:
767:
762:
758:
757:
752:
748:
745:
743:
738:
734:
732:
724:
721:
719:
715:
711:
710:Rainbowwrasse
707:
704:
700:
696:
693:
691:
687:
683:
679:
676:
674:
670:
666:
662:
658:
655:
654:
651:
647:
643:
640:
635:
634:9780415975384
632:
628:
625:
621:
617:
615:
612:
608:
604:
603:
602:
601:
596:
593:
592:
589:
585:
581:
577:
574:
572:
568:
564:
563:
557:
554:
552:
549:
545:
541:
538:
536:
532:
528:
524:
521:
520:Americentrism
517:
513:
512:
505:
501:
497:
492:
491:Americentrism
488:
487:
486:
482:
478:
474:
470:
469:
468:
467:
462:
458:
454:
450:
446:
439:
435:
434:Americentrism
431:
426:
425:
422:
418:
414:
410:
407:
406:
401:
397:
393:
389:
385:
381:
377:
373:
369:
365:
360:
359:
358:
357:
354:
350:
346:
342:
338:
334:
331:
327:
323:
319:
314:
311:
307:
303:
299:
294:
293:
290:
286:
282:
278:
275:
274:
271:
267:
263:
259:
258:Americentrism
254:
253:
250:
246:
242:
238:
234:
230:
226:
225:
224:New Statesman
220:
216:
215:
210:
206:
203:
202:
201:
200:
196:
192:
188:
178:
174:
171:
168:
164:
160:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
138:
135:
132:
128:
125:
124:Find sources:
120:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
785:
782:
765:
754:
746:
730:
722:
702:
694:
677:
665:Stuartyeates
656:
594:
575:
560:
555:
539:
522:
515:
443:— Preceding
408:
387:
383:
379:
375:
371:
367:
363:
336:
276:
232:
222:
212:
209:I don't know
208:
184:
172:
166:
158:
151:
145:
139:
133:
123:
45:
43:
31:
28:
756:portmanteau
682:Dipankan001
622:Routledge.
388:Americanism
380:Americanism
149:free images
50:Mkativerata
627:0415975387
548:Neutrality
413:Harizotoh9
737:Wolfowitz
544:WP:DICDEF
322:• Gene93k
302:• Gene93k
703:redirect
657:Redirect
496:HazelGHC
457:contribs
449:HazelGHC
445:unsigned
337:possible
262:HazelGHC
191:HazelGHC
116:View log
766:P 1 9 9
527:Bearian
477:Carrite
392:Carrite
345:Bearian
281:Carrite
241:Bearian
211:. The
155:WP refs
143:scholar
89:protect
84:history
731:Kiefer
576:Delete
540:Delete
219:that's
127:Google
93:delete
706:there
567:talk
516:merge
409:Merge
227:also
170:JSTOR
131:books
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
772:TALK
714:talk
695:Keep
686:talk
678:Keep
669:talk
646:talk
631:ISBN
624:ISBN
611:ISBN
595:Keep
584:talk
556:Keep
531:talk
523:into
500:talk
481:talk
453:talk
432:and
417:talk
396:talk
349:talk
326:talk
306:talk
285:talk
277:Keep
266:talk
245:talk
233:anti
207:...
195:talk
163:FENS
137:news
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
46:keep
759:of
749:to
659:to
580:TFD
562:DGG
518:of
205:Feh
177:TWL
114:– (
769:•
716:)
708:.
688:)
671:)
663:.
648:)
629:,
586:)
569:)
533:)
502:)
483:)
459:)
455:•
419:)
398:)
351:)
343:.
328:)
320:.
308:)
300:.
287:)
268:)
247:)
239:.
197:)
189:.
157:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
735:.
712:(
684:(
667:(
644:(
582:(
565:(
529:(
498:(
479:(
451:(
415:(
394:(
347:(
324:(
304:(
283:(
264:(
243:(
193:(
181:)
173:·
167:·
159:·
152:·
146:·
140:·
134:·
129:(
121:(
118:)
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.