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. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The revolution of farmers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Pure WP:ESSAY with minimal sourcing, using lots of WP:SYNTH Gaijin42 (talk) 15:53, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Keep - Abusively nominated for deletion 2 minutes after creation. It's not a finished piece, the question of sourcing remains open. I am going to put up a CONSTRUCTION banner on behalf of the creator, with my apologies to her or him. Carrite (talk) 17:00, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - This is a new editor this month. Trout to the nominator for biting the newcomer... Carrite (talk) 17:13, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - The new content creator accidentally put up 3 versions of the same piece for 3 titles rather than using the proper method for creating redirects. I have BOLDly made two of these into redirects to this piece, removing speedy templates in the process. Feel free to check my work on this. I think this is the worst title of the three; in the event that this closes a Keep, which it should, a title change to 1970s Thailand peasant revolts or some such is in order, in my view. Carrite (talk) 18:26, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I've been in communication with the content creator off wiki. He is a serious person and this is a serious academic topic. Proper notability defense to follow if the nomination isn't withdrawn — which would be appreciated, of course. The title on the piece now is bad and needs to be changed for sure, the topic is the 1970s rural revolutionary movement in Thailand that paralleled similar events in Cambodia/Kampuchea, Laos, and Vietnam. Carrite (talk) 15:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• This doesn't read like an essay to me, but like an imperfect but sincere encyclopedia article in progress, about a genuinely notable topic, by a new editor whose only failing is not being familiar with some of the finer points of Wikipedia conventions (and since we were all newbies once, that isn't really a failing.) Additional sourcing is needed, but numerous valid sources are already present. The title isn't good, but that can be fixed. All in all, this isn't a deletion candidate -- it's an article that doesn't have anything wrong with it that can't be fixed through the normal Wikipedia processes of article improvement. Keep. Bearcat (talk) 15:50, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Striking my technical issue-based speedy recommendation and moving to a more typical defense. Multiple sources already showing. The content creator (newcomer) points in particular to these:

(1) Tyrell Haberkorn, Revolution Interrupted: Farmers, Students, Law, and Violence in Northern Thailand. Chiang Mai, Thailand: Silkworm Books, 2011.

(2) David Morell, Political Conflict in Thailand: Reform, Reaction, Revolution. Germany: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain, Publishers, 1981.

(3) Hans U. Luther, December 1978). "Peasants and State in Contemporary Thailand." International Journal of Politics, vol. 8, no. 4 (December 1978), pp. 1–120. —JSTOR: Subscription required.

To repeat, this is a serious topic of scholarship among specialists in the history of Southeast Asia. A change of name will follow shortly after closure. A withdrawal of the nomination would be appreciated. Carrite (talk) 02:43, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Hi Hi. Hope this is the correct way Y'All. Think theres a misunderstanding here. I deleted the previous versions cause i was surprised that the title was changed. I didnt know how to change the the title. Sorry. Still learning. This is part of my assignment for fulfillment of one of my modules for my grad studies. Am still in the process of doing up an article. Basically about the revolt in Thailand by the farmers during the 1970s. No harm intended here and hope you guys cut a newbie some slack. Am serious about my piece and any advice appreciated. User:ChristopherWB —Preceding undated comment added 02:56, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:37, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:37, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and discuss the article title on its talk page. Why is it that so many people, when they encounter a well-written article, claim that it is an essay rather than an encyclopedia article? This is far better written as an encyclopedia article than the vast majority of our content. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, likely rename, and improve - An inherently notable topic that is a benefit to the encyclopedia. Northamerica1000^(talk) 06:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep and rename. The article has enough sources to establish notability. However, it should be renamed to signify that it is about farmers in Thailand, such as "Revolution of Thai farmers." Hadger 17:11, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep -- It is bad form to nominate an article so quickly. The article in its presetn form is clearly on a notable subject. I note that the map highlights only one province. I am therefore not convinced that the present name is the best possible, but that is a matter of detail. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:55, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:13, 5 November 2012 (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.