Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sikhs in Belgium
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The result was Nom withdrawn and Keep. Navou banter 23:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content as per Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion Articles section criteria #7. Qwertyca 01:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sikhs in Belgium
EDIT - The author himself User:Sunnybondsinghjalwehra is a Sikh in Belgium and based on the name, is possibly related to one of the prominent figures mentioned in the article. Not that it matters, but it could possibly be WP:COI. Besides, the group isn't anything notable - they have not impacted the history or current affairs of Belgium, India, Punjab, Sikhism or Europe in any important way (unlike the comments about Muslims in Europe). Nor do they have any members of their community who have done anything notable (and if they do that should be listed on the page). Additionally, the article jumps from discussing a group in general to talking about the death of one of it's members without even mentioning who he is or why his death is in any way relevant to the article. -- Qwertyca 02:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
EDIT - Ok CanadianCaesar, that's a better article now. Thanks for your input. How do I un-nominate this from deletion? Admin if you're reading this please don't delete. Thanks. --Qwertyca 05:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep um, there should be no question about this. It's not a group, it's a minority group, and is paralleled with many articles such as Islam in the United States, Islam in Canada... CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- By which I meant, no question about the notability. The article itself is clearly hurting. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- Note that I've now rewritten it as a stub. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 03:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- By which I meant, no question about the notability. The article itself is clearly hurting. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- As I disagree that this fits the intent of CSD #7, I'll have to go with a
Neutral, leaning towards keep(though it does need a notability statement desparately). Long term, this should probably be a section in a more comprehensive Sikhism in Europe entry.... -- MarcoTolo 02:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Changing to Keep per CanadianCaesar's edits. -- MarcoTolo 03:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. It is a notable topic and it is a decent stub. John Vandenberg 04:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- Comment It seems to me that this is misleading. It's not an article about sikhs in Belgium, it's an article, and a sketchy one at that, about one incident of violence which an editor has attempted to dress up by giving it this title and attempting to place it in a broader context, which might in itself constitute some form of OR.--Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 05:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'll work on that a bit.--T. Anthony 14:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep sourced, encyclopaedic. Merely a stub is not a criterion for deletion. WilyD 15:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - interesting even though it is a stub. This article adds value to wikipedia. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep encyclopedic... —dima/s-ko/ 20:42, 12 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.
