Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Telugu Brahmins

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. Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 14:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Telugu Brahmins

Telugu Brahmins (discussion|history|protect|delete|undelete|logs|links)

Non notable, contains information already found in Brahmin. Sfacets 02:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

• Keep and cleanup. Appears to be a genuine topic, needs elaboration and copyediting though. Westenra 03:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Merge or redirect with/to Brahmin. Keeping the POV out of this article seems to be something that people aren't interested in, and un-doing the changes a few people have made has been a chore, to say the least. I'm inclined to say that Telugu Brahmins is little more than a self-serving fluff piece for a very small subsection of people. That said, we need an article about the Brahmin caste, and I don't see the harm in having a Telugu subsection in it. Kevin 03:21, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. The article needs help, but the subject appears to be notable and distinct. Telugu Brahmins are one of the linguistic classifications of Brahmins described in Classification of Brahmins. Compare Kannada Brahmins. There's a corresponding category (Category:Telugu_Brahmins) and quite a few sub-groupings (e.g. Niyogi, Aaraama_Dravidulu) with their own articles. An argument for deletion or merge should make the case, with arguments grounded in the subject matter, that the article does not represent something legitimate or noteworthy. The fact that someone edited in redundant text calls for remedial editing, not AfD. -- Shunpiker 03:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'm still not seeing where this crosses over from an arbitrary subgroup, and in to something notable or distinct. For all intents and purposes, this is no different than an article entitled "French Catholics in the United States" (e.g. a redirect to a more general cultural page), or "White-collar people from the United Kingdom who speak Welsh". Kevin 07:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Reply: With all due respect, does anybody familiar with the subject matter agree? There's a real risk here that people who don't understand the cultural distinctions (I include myself) may undo the work of people who do with broad-brush analogies that don't apply. There are 80 million Telugu speakers. We're not talking about a small group of people. There aren't that many Catholics in all of the United States, let alone in North Carolina. Or people in North Carolina, for that matter. Or Wales. Or the entire United Kingdom. According to the article, the Telugu Brahmin tradition outdates the United States by some 500-700 years. Is it so hard to believe that a people speaking a distinct language might develop a recognizable tradition over such a period of time? -- Shunpiker 04:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC) P.S. I've edited out the most obvious redundancies with Brahmin. P.P.S. According to this article, Brahmins make up 2% of the population of Andhra Pradesh. Take 2% of 66 million (native Telugu speakers), 75 million (population of AP), or 80 million (Telugu speakers), you get about a million and a half people.
• Keep. This appears to be an article about a regional caste/sub-caste similar to Khatris. I think it can be kept as it relates to a distinct group of a distinct ethnicity. Nlsanand 04:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete:Lots if not most of the content can already be found in the Brahmin article. This is not a sub-group of Brahmins in that they do not have a different belief system from any other Brahmin group. This is a sub group of a sub group, and doesn't merit it's own article, unless more unique content can be provided. Alot of Brahmin subgroups have articles dedicated to nothing but a list of surnames, or "famous Brahmins" whichprovide no information on the subject, and are generally unsourced. Aaraama_Dravidulu is an example of this. These articles should be amalgamated, if not in one article, then at least not disparate and vaguely connected sub categories. Sfacets 05:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Finally, an argument in terms of Brahminism instead of Catholicism! Thank you! If the subgroups don't merit their own articles, perhaps they could be merged up into Telugu Brahmins? Then that article will have more unique content and Wikipedia will have fewer disparate and vaguely connected artices. -- Shunpiker 05:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and Redirect to Brahmin I agree with Sfactes, we don't have an article about Catholicism in Durham, North Carolina, do we? ST47Talk 12:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and redirect to the main Brahmin article per above comments. It's not necessary to create subarticles for each region. --musicpvm 17:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep and Cleanup per Nlsanand. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 00:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This appears to be a very distinct and historic caste. --Oakshade 06:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep -- "When in doubt ..." -- Simon Cursitor 08:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as a legitimate article about a notable topic. Needs some rephrasing and citations, but is far from unsalvageable. --Czj 18:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. This is a valid and encyclopedic article about a distinct and historic caste. RFerreira 06:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

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.