Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Racism by country

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Racism by country

Racism_by_country (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) -- (View AfD)

• Delete or Rewrite with Nuetrality and inclusion: I have nominated this article for deletion because it has a strong POV, it is poorly written, the sources are not cited, it contains original research. It is biased and exclusive of certain countries, see talk page. Certain countries are always removed from the list despite valid content with references. It is not of encyclopedic value but a collection of people opinions of racism by country. Some of the material here is copy and pasted and hence available in the respective sections. If offers nothing of value and is again a serious NPOV.--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 05:24, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
• Don't delete: I am from Latin America and this article speaks plainly of things I consider true. I agree that the article has a strong POV with no cited sources, but i believe it is a legitimate POV. The reader can see that the sources are not cited, and thus can benefit from this POV without accepting it.

I am sure your section may be valid but the issue is the entire article. request for diversity and general clean up have been ignored. We need references and inclusion of countries with clear racism, this kind of exclusion is very dangerous--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 07:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - there is no original research in the article; the article appears to have a NPOV, and does not appear to violate any existing Policies or Guidelines. Anthonycfc ^{[T • C]} 15:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

the article is full of original research with no references. it is thus a stream of POV which are anything but Neutral, read the article in full. It is like a wild shooting contest. even the sentences dont make sense.--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 15:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 16:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, the claim that it has no references is false, although a large amount of text is unreferenced. The best solution I can think of is that all countries should have their own Racism article (ie, Racism in the United States) and this article should be split into these forks, but those sections in this article that are POV and unsourcable should be deleted outright before the article is split. There seems to be some salvagable nuggets in there that shouldn't be thrown out with the bathwater. hateless 19:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this as you can see from my suggestion this is what i was saying some sections are okay but some are very poor.--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 20:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - sourced, encyclopaedic. No criterion for deletion has been presented. WilyD 14:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I think we solve POV problems by editing to a NPOV , not by discarding the articleDGG 03:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per above. I don't see POV, but even if it was there, it is not a reason for deletion. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 09:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Per above--Sefringle 03:54, 10 January 2007 (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.