Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White History

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 speedy delete. —Korath (Talk) 01:36, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] White History

Nonsense. RickK 06:17, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, POV, neologism. Lacrimosus 06:29, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Neologism that could turn real ugly real fast. android↔talk 06:32, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
  • Perhaps less quickly now that I've removed the hyperlink from African American history. Uncle G 15:00, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC)
• Delete Fuzheado | Talk 06:33, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete or redirect to Caucasian. Gazpacho 07:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Neologism, it is not the history of; the academic discipline of History does not have historians who study (and historiography for) people who are racially white, not as such. El_C 07:34, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• No Vote: What a can of worms!! Of the 27,700 Google hits for 'white history', most appear to be for individuals, companies, etc., named White. However, many appear to be about racial history (and not all crackpots): White History web site, The case for 'White History Month', Boston Globe, MBA MBULU'S AN INTRODUCTION TO WHITE HISTORY: The History of White America, White History Month Campaign, Churchhill-the truth; guardian.co.uk. No vote as it's not a subject that interests me enough to work on. However, if it stays, it should be about the subject of white history. As El C says, white history itself does not appear to be a discipline. DialUp 16:57, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Within the academic discipline of History, that is. El_C 04:58, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Loaded neologism. Any mention of "White history month" is really just hyperbole arguing against black history month. DaveTheRed 23:27, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• No vote: I think we should have people look up a white history that is not racist, because whenever we look up white history in Yahoo! or Google, we get web sites of White History that are made by white supremacists that do not give accurate information, so for a change lets have a White history page that does not have a racist or prejudice attitude. 66.81.190.183
  • At any event, anonymous votes are not counted. El_C 05:01, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, absolutely nonsensical ≈ jossi ≈ 04:02, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy deleted as Nazi vandalism. --Neutrality^talk 05:07, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
  • Good call. El_C 05:08, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• No Vote How the hell can you delete White History and not Black History what about Indian History or Jewish History or Islamic History??? Drexel1 23:08, 28 Mar 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.