Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-white

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.

The result of the debate was delete. – ABCD 01:20, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Non-white

This page is not only poorly composed, but entirely un-needed. The term is self-descriptive, and I can hardly see anyone ever searching wikipedia to find an encyclopedic entry for the term. I propose deletion; however, if it is to be contained on Wikimedia, it belongs on Wiktionary with a super-simplified description, not on Wikipedia. --Trypa Party 21:14, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. POV, original research, and self-descriptive. Dave the Red 23:37, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. POV racismcruft. android↔talk 23:55, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete racist POV garbage. —Seselwa 01:31, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete A shame and a half that this even exits. --FuriousFreddy 01:43, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete-- WB 02:32, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, POV, original research. Megan1967 06:20, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. POV trash. Template:Racist has also been added to the article. Firebug 09:37, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - pointless and uninformative The JPS 19:50, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - rambling original essay on a non-encyclopedic topic. - Mustafaa 22:09, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - POV, racist, barely literate gobbledegook. Soundguy99 18:37, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - NPOV it, substantiate its information, clean it up, and it could be of encyclopedic value. Especially if it gave account of the history of the term and the variations of its usage. Morning star 00:08, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.