Welcome to fedrix.com on July 12 2009.
This is an internet experiment running to monitor browsing habbits of individuals through wikipedia contents.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Ethnic groups

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Points of interest related to Ethnic groups on Wikipedia
Category – WikiProject – Deletions
Deletion Sorting
Project
Project page (talk)
Lists (by ABC)
Lists (by topic)
AfD: Today, Yesterday
edit · changes

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Ethnic groups. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting.

Anyone can help maintain the list on this page:

  • To add a new AfD discussion (once it has already been opened on WP:AFD):
  • Look through the list of current discussions to find items related to this subject area.
  • Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  • You can also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Ethnic groups}}<small>—~~~~</small> to it, which will inform users that it has been listed here.
  • There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
  • Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
  • You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Ethnic groups.

Please note that adding an AfD to, or removing it from, this page does not add it to, or remove it from, the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page, before adding it to this page.

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archive Relevant archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Ethnic groups/archive.
Purge page cache Watch this page

Contents

[edit] Ethnic groups

[edit] Andro-ethnic

Andro-ethnic (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

non notable proto-logism WuhWuzDat 01:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete asap. Abductive (talk) 02:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Seems like a non-notable neologism. Can't find any sources for it. Jafeluv (talk) 05:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. WP:NEO. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Badly formed neologism. The combined roots do not mean the intended meaning, which would be better served by cryptoethnic or holethnic; the actual roots suggest "belonging to men (human males) as an ethnic group", which would be a pleasantly ridiculous notion but for separatist feminism. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:10, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 20:50, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete as neologism without sources, lacking notability. The article is also poorly written - I'm not sure if the author is asserting that this is a term of art in media circles ("it used to describe a movement within the media, particularly with the writers and producers of children's television shows"), or simply as a possible neologism ("This term could be considered.... In reality we are unlikely to find...") to describe this perceived "movement". In either case, I could not find any potential sources. Cnilep (talk) 21:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Oddly, the single occurrence (outside Wikipedia) of "andro-ethnic" indexed by Google, here, seems to use the word to mean ethnic in the sense of "from an ethnic group" (other than my own). Isn't that opposite to what this page says? Cnilep (talk) 21:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Armenian Brazilian

Armenian Brazilian (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

There is no evidence of the notability and no consent for this article. Yes, may be there are Armenians in Brazil, however it must be very small minority as it is useless to open for each tiny minority new article. Also there is no sources to back up this info.--NovaSkola (talk) 21:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I believe the population figure of 143,000 as the Joshua Project is definitely not a reliable source (see this discussion, for example), but size has nothing to do with notability. cab (talk) 10:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep - notable and sourced article about a notable population. Can and should be expanded. Badagnani (talk) 16:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Not enough coverage from secondary reliable independent sources: [1]. Algébrico (talk) 01:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
    • I just pointed to non-trivial sources directly above, including a 38-page journal article about this population. The reason you don't get GScholar hits for "Armênio Brasileiro" is because it's a made-up phrase which people don't use. Not every ethnic minority in Brasil is called "Fooian Brazilian". Find sources: "Armênios * Brasil" — news, books, scholar returns quite a few more potential sources, even an entire book on this very topic [2]. cab (talk) 05:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Montenegrin Australian

Montenegrin Australian (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

I'm not seeing the notability of an ethnic group of ~1,000 people out of a larger group of 22 million people in Australia. This group makes up .0045 percent of the population of Australia, not even a drop in the bucket... Tavix |  Talk  21:18, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep Size has nothing to do with notability. Topic is covered in other specialist encyclopedias and seems reasonably notable: Zizic, Danilo (2001), "Montenegrins", in Jupp, James, The Australian people: an encyclopedia of the nation, its people, and their origins, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 9780521807890 . cab (talk) 10:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep: notable, verifiable. - Altenmann >t 10:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Doesn't seem a notable designation to me. There are no reliable sources *discussing* (rather than merely establishing the existence of) a Crnogorski community in Australia - how did it get here? why? in what way does it distinguish itself or interact with other groups in the Australian community? etc. Other ethnicities have books, theses and significant research behind them. Orderinchaos 12:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - Notable and sourced article on a notable ethnic community in Australia. Badagnani (talk) 03:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] List of topics related to Black and African people

List of topics related to Black and African people (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Generic lists of lists of articles. No references. No particular ordering (not by date, not by importance). Better done by existing category and template structure, such as {{Pan-African}} and {{African American topics sidebar}}.

  • Delete --William Allen Simpson (talk) 10:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:09, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete: Overly vague list. Determining what "relates" to blacks is too subjective. Blacks watch TV, smoke cigarettes and drive cars. Are those "related" to blacks? Has no defineable criteria. The list is trying to be all things to all topics. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep and consider dividing. It might be better to have this on African topics, and a separate one for the diaspora. It is in the US anyway reasonably clear what topics relate to the Black experience in the US. I do not consider any of the ones on the list totally out of place, though some deal with the experience of Black people along with other minorities. The place to discuss any that are questioned is the talk page, as usual. DGG (talk) 20:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I have no idea what you mean. One would assume that almost every American topic would somehow relate to the "black experience" in the US. — Rankiri (talk) 20:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
and so they would, if one wrote the specific article relating it. And so we should. We would not have "Kansas" on this list, but Blacks (or Afro-Americans) in Kansas history is a very appropriate topic. The best way of going forward at present would be to see if there are other articles to add here, and write the 100s or 1000s of appropriate ones we are probably missing. DGG (talk) 20:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep because everything in the nomination is specifically refuted by WP:CLN. There are very good reasons to have lists as well as categories. I can watchlist a list. I can make a list sortable by criteria other than alphabetical order. Wikipedians can usually use categories effectively, but end-users (i.e. non-Wikipedians) find lists easier to use; few of them are even aware of categories.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 22:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Normally, I'd agree with you. But this has no annotation, no criteria for inclusion, no sorting. I'd prefer to stick to the actuality, rather than some hoped for pie in the sky.
    --William Allen Simpson (talk) 12:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep per User:DGG] & User:S Marshall. Useful, well organized list. However, I think the article title is misleading - presumably it means Black Africans, thus excluding articles on Rhodes, Smith, Botha, etc. —G716 <T·C> 02:29, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. -- —G716 <T·C> 02:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom & Niteshift36. Indiscriminate hodgepodge of topics that juxtaposes African American & Afro-Caribbean subjects with, among other things, completely unrelated topics such as the North African caliphates and Aboriginal rock. Selection appears to have been based on highly subjective criteria as to what exactly constitutes a "black" civilization or topic; see discussion. Also runs afoul of WP:SALAT as listing is too broad in scope. Soupforone (talk) 09:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete way too broad (WP:SALAT violation) and Niteshift summed it up perfectly. Blacks do a lot of things and there is no reason why these are listed while others aren't. Tavix |  Talk  19:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment. Can it be renamed into something less ambiguous? List of ethnological topics related to black people, perhaps? Otherwise, I tend to agree with Niteshift36 and the others: the list is simply too broad in scope and would have to adopt an excessively segregationist inclusion criteria in order to stay manageable and useful. — Rankiri (talk) 15:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep I think the name of the article and the scope can be fine tuned, but the list article is a very useful encyclopedic and helpful catalog of topics. The sbuject areas covered are very notable and I think it's worth including. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:43, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep the list has a lot of blue links, to relevant categories, and is thus valid. The name should be changed. The word Africa should not be included in it, since you aren't talking about the white South Africans, or the Arabs of the Egypt or other north African nations. Dream Focus 20:33, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete per soupforone. Alefbe (talk) 20:14, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletions

[edit] Categories

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Ethnic_groups"
Personal tools
Visit joltnews for the latest headlines
Visit bloit.com for company information
Geed Media does computer consulting on long island.
This page viewed times. See Logs