Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black-Africans in Australia

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 delete. Singularity 02:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Black-Africans in Australia

Black-Africans in Australia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

undefined term as stated by the article,

• Delete. Serves no purpose and seems to be somewhat streesing the word "black", which may have racialist conotation. All the incarnations should function as redirects to
  African Australian. The Ogre (talk) 00:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • I see Black Australians is a dab page. Good. The Ogre (talk) 00:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Per nomination. Renee (talk) 01:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per the tag on the article, to
  African Australian. Same concept; better name. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 03:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• comment merge what?, with the exception of African Americans were stationed in Australia as US soldiers and sailors during the Second World War and Vietnam War, allowing opportunties for then predominantly white Australia to come in contact with a new and different ethnic group[3] all other sourced material is in the article. The only other information not covered is the unsourced
  WP:SYNTH There is no clear definition of what constitutes being an "African Australian" (or "Afro-Australian"). Along with indigenous Africans who were born in Africa, the term could encompass people as disparate as Caribbean British, African Americans or Cape Malays who with an African upbringing or family background have chosen Australia as their new home. The Australian Bureau of Statistics records people according to their birthplace and their self-described ancestry, although aggregated data for Africa is split between "Sub-Saharan" and "North Africa and the Middle East". Gnangarra 04:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Well then redirect. Whatever. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 07:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Per black people. Habanero-tan (talk) 05:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The article is complete non-sense, and unencyclopedic. Dwilso 07:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per JeremyMcCracken.--Berig (talk) 07:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the
  talk) 08:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete No encyclopedic content. Doesnt need to be redirected, i cant see people looking up this topic on here. Five Years 11:38, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Appears to be a POV fork of
  H₂O) 08:41, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete as a unneeded articles, for a subject already covered in
  African Australian.-- danntm ^T _C 21:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete, would appear to be an unnecessary fork of
  African Australian. Nothing in this article that isn't in that one. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 07:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC).[reply
  ]
• Delete Seems like a POV fork of
  talk ♠ Review) 00:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete I won't dignify this article with a reason. Kransky (talk) 11:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.