Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaimal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 no consensus due to plethora of possible SPA opinions expressed here. Please take merge discussions to appropriate talk pages. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 20:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kaimal

All these articles created against WP:NOR policy and may be re-directed (or have a brief mention about it) to Nair or Caste system in Kerala (in list-wise order, if references established). Another two more editors have also raised concern about whether to keep this or not. Thanks. --Avinesh Jose T 13:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because [as mentioned above]:

Avinesh Jose T 05:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/India. --Avinesh Jose T 05:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Keep- There is proper referencing for the article, although more may be required. More content should be added about the Kaimals, rather than just deleting the article.Jammedfly (talk) 05:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment: Above user has only 22 edits. All above articles qualify as WP:OR and there are no reliable independent sources available. --Avinesh Jose T 08:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment: I don't know what my contribution to Wikipedia has anything to do with the validity of my statements. The fact is there are numerous credible independant references to the most of the above articles. For example from the Nambiar article:

1. ^ Bombay (India : Presidency) (1883). Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency. Govt. Central Press, 195. Retrieved on 2007-12-18. 2. ^ C. J. Fuller, The Internal Structure of the Nayar Caste, Journal of Anthropological Research (1975), p. 285. 3. ^ A general collection of ... voyages and travels, digested by J. Pinkerton - Page 736 4. ^ Kareem, C.K. (1973). Kerala under Haider Ali and Tipu Sultan. Paico publishing house, 136,137. Retrieved on 2007-12-18.

1. Fawcett. F Nairs of Malabar. Asian Educational Services, NewDelhi. 1990. 2. Miller, Eric J. 1954. Caste and Territory in Malabar. American Anthropologists 56(3):410-420. 3. Miller, Eric J. 1955. Village Structure in North Kerala. In M.N. Srinivas ed. India’s Village. Bombay: Media Promoters & Publishers. 4. Gough, Kathleen 1955a. Female Initiation Rites on the Malabar Coast. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 85(1/2): 45-80. 5. Makkam: The Story of the "Canonization" of a Nayar Woman A. Aiyappan Folklore, Vol. 45, No. 2 (Jun., 1934), pp. 164-169

Even the Kaimal, a stub article, has a credible reference. Articles such as Panikkar, Nambiar, Karnavar, cannot be merged into a single article such as Nair, because they are too long and also because it relates to other communities such as Ezhava, Ambalavasi, Brahmin as well. The above articles should exist for the same reason that there are articles on Kerala, Haryana, Tamil Nadu, etc. which haven't all been merged with the India article. For the above mentioned stub articles, they should be made larger by valuable contributions. As far as I know it is not Wikipedia policy to cut down stub articles instead of making them better.Jammedfly (talk) 01:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

As I commented above, all these must be merged with ‘Cast system in Kerala’ article with a small description (no need of creating separate article since lacking its significance or notability). I am not much sure about the references you are furnished. Still all these articles drawing on editor’s personal knowledge and did not cite with valid sources. If that is the case, it should not have nominated. --Avinesh Jose T 04:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

(You commented) I don't know what my contribution to Wikipedia has anything to do with the validity of my statements. Please note that I’m not discouraging you to comment. WP is very glad you wish to help develop this encyclopedia. New users are always welcome (WP:WEL) and don’t feel that I’m biting you. However, as a new user you may not have much awareness of our policy i.e in this case, WP:NOR. Please do not mistaken. --Avinesh Jose T 07:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment: If the articles are merged with Nair or Caste System of Kerala, the article will become much too long, and information will be deleted by other users, causing important information (which are properly referenced) to be lost. You will also find that there are articles on Nair, Ezhava, Nambudiri. Then why not merge them all into a giant article as well? The groups such as Kaimal, Kurup, Menon, Panikkar, Nambiar deserve their own articles since they are different communities.Jammedfly (talk) 00:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep- per Jammedfly.(Shyamsunder) 18:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Comment - I'm not sure we can have a useful deletion discussion on this. If sourced, I think some (but perhaps not all) of these articles have their own independent notability. But the offline sources cited are described so poorly it is hard in some to know what the claimed source is. Often it is just an author and a title - no publisher, year, location, etc. To be fair, a little googling does turn up some of these sources, e.g. [[1]]. Assuming good faith, this does seem to be legitimate encyclopedic content that is simply in need of some careful improvement. Wikidemo (talk) 11:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep- Plenty of encylopedic content unrelated to the general Nair article, references for most articles, large numbers of people belonging to the communities mentioned easily making it notable enough. If each Jatt clan in Punjab gets their article, I don't see why Nair sub-castes can't find a spot on an encyclopedia.Nambo (talk) 14:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't an argument. Relata refero (talk) 15:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 16:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep - content seems to be encyclopedic. Have we started a rally against offline sources that I'm unaware of? matt91486 (talk) 16:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep all all these articles are of importance.

Tinucherian (talk) 08:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

(above comment) possible bad faith comment. details. User:Tinucherian had invloved in bad faith nomination also. --Avinesh Jose T 05:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep all. stubs with potential. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 19:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete.

Potential? Funny! This a subcaste (or the title conferred on it) of a subcaste of a caste. The article is created by Single Purpose Account promoting upper caste uppity stuff on Wikipedia. I have shown on several occasions that he provides false references. An entry in an old-fashioned reference (of marginal academic relevance) has an entry on kaimal, which can be seen here. Incidentally this shows that the reference in the article is false. At best a Wiktionary item.59.91.253.37 (talk) 14:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

— 59.91.253.37 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. --Avinesh Jose T 09:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment: Kaimal is a subcaste of Nair, also used as a title. It may not be a major subcaste like Menon, Panikkar or Nambiar which have differences to each other (usually they do not intermarry readily). Your contributions do not show that you have proved that people have been making false references. Old-fashioned references of academic relevance (even though it may be marginal) are useful and maybe you should list this in the Kaimal article. Also I am not a sockpuppet of anyone and I believe you have absolutely no evidence to prove that I am, only that my account is a new one.Jammedfly (talk) 00:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Merge into Nair, no independent existence required at this stage. The articles can always be resurrected if someone produces enough references to actually build independent articles rather than the pathetic combination of stubs and self-aggrandizement we have currently. Relata refero (talk) 19:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment: Please refer to the larger articles that have been nominated for deletion such as Panikkar, Nambiar, Samanthan which would make the Nair article enormous in size. Also people belonging to these communities identify themselves as Panikkar, Nair or Samanthan Kshatriya, although they belong to the Nair community. It would be like cramming the articles on Rajput, Lohana, Kamboja, Jatt, Khatri, Malayala Kshatriya all into the Kshatriya article.Jammedfly (talk) 22:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I've looked at them. If we eliminate even a fraction of the unsourced content, there'll be no problem at all. Relata refero (talk) 22:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

The Nair article is already large as it is. And not only is the problem related to size, but also notability. Panikkar, Samanthan and Nambiar are large subcastes each with significant population. The customs of each group can vary widely (e.g. Samanthans and Nambiars do not have Talikettu, only Poduvamuri), just as the traditions of Nambudiri Brahmins vary with Kashmiri Pundits. Just as there are articles for the different subcastes of Brahmin (Nambudiri, Iyer, Iyengar, Saraswat, etc.) when it could all be merged into one article, there should also be articles for the subcastes of Nairs, given that it is significant like the Nambiars, Samanthans, Panikkar, etc.Jammedfly (talk) 21:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

As mentioned below, the Nair article has lots of space once the pooicy-ciolating quotefarm is removed. As to notability, once sufficient reliable sources are demonstrated for each section in the main article, then, if necessary, they can be spun out into individual articles. There are insufficient RSes for all of these currently. Relata refero (talk) 15:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Note to the closing admin: If it is merging, Achayan shouldn’t be merged to Nair. It should be mentioned in Saint Thomas Christians or Syrian Malabar Nasrani. Thanks. --Avinesh Jose T 04:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep the articles. Each of them has a distinct meaning and position in society and as a previous user mentioned, Nair is too long to merge anything into it. Or else have a separate article called Nair Titles or something which clubs all of these. Manu —Preceding comment was added at 13:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Once the quotefarm that can safely be transwikied, is, there will be tons of space. Relata refero (talk) 15:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Problem not only with space, but the fact that the above articles are notable in their own right.Jammedfly (talk) 22:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

(Manu commented): Each of them has a distinct meaning and position in society. It is not a big issue, if it is merging to Nair in list-wise order. I don’t think keeping all this as independent articles per ~~WP:N~~, see WP:NOR. According to Jimmy Wales, 1, "Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information". Thanks. --Avinesh Jose T 04:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I suggest again that instead of merging it with Nair, we could have a new article, say List of Nair Titles or somthing similar in which all of this can be fitted. Manu —Preceding comment was added at 05:03, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

No need, because it is not very important. In my opinion, let us make a new ‘section’ in Nair itself. It is already there, see Typical Nair last names, We don’t completely transwiki the entire contents as it is. Just to list each titles briefly with a small discription, no further importance required. --Avinesh Jose T 05:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

How is the Jimmy Wales quote about being against misleading or false information relevant to these Nair subcaste articles Mr Jose?. Like of I said before among 4 million Nairs these sub-castes, some of whom are/have been endogamous, have significant amounts of people belonging to them. I would support having a list of Nair sub-caste page for the smaller Nair sub-caste articles with no references such as the list of Simpsons characters article, like Manu proposes. I sincerely hope being clueless about Nair communities and Malabar (I assume based on your decision to put up Achayan for deletion) does not cloud your views in decision making Mr Jose.Nambiar (talk) 01:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Mr. Nambiar, the whole sub castle articles are made-up with a lot of original research and many of them seem like a spammy tone. That’s why I quoted Jimmy Wales comments in this case. And please keep in mind that I asked for a third opinion in Kerala discussion forum also. Based on the respond I’ve nominated. We need to get a clear consensus in this case. Thanks. Check this DRV also (see the annomy user's comment).--Avinesh Jose T 04:12, 9 February 2008 (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.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaimal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Kaimal

Views

Navigation

Interaction

Search