Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Latin American Jews (2nd nomination)

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. No deletion argument referring to our policies or guidelines, and arguments that only seem to be extensions of

WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Fritzpoll (talk) 17:51, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

List of Latin American Jews

)

)

Delete. These lists are nothing more than a dumping ground for red links (over half of the content), promotional material (Edit Comment: "remove promotional material,"), relatives (Edit comment: "Levi Marrero was my grandfather"), etc...

"Clean up and keep" doesn't make sense here unless you want to tackle the cleaning up, as there's a reason its been stagnant for 3 years, averaging about 15 edits per year, most of them by one-time users who just want to add an obscure name. Nobody wants to tackle it because its impossible to tackle: more than half the names have few (if any) sources actually showing notability. Sourcing for Judaism is nearly more impossible because so many names can only be found on Spanish websites. For the sources that do exist, many are un-heard-of and few are strong.

Some names that actually have been given articles were speedily deleted. "Removing backlinks to Alvaro Bayona Gomez that has been speedily deleted per (CSD A7);"

For most of the blue links, the people are not truly of that country-ethnic-origin. For example "Geraldo Rivera" and "Joaquin Phoenix" are somehow Puerto-Rican Jewish Americans through a completely different method than you would expect. Their Caucasian relatives were Jewish.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 15:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 15:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment: I'm not sure why we have ANY of these lists. Granted, I'm not a huge fan of WIkipedia lists in general, but somehow labeling people for the purpose of placing them on a list just seems wrong. But that is more a personal opinion than anything else. --Susan118 ^talk 19:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Pointless lists that don't seem to be relevant to anything else. Checking out what links to this list, most of it is other "lists of Jews". Do any of these lists tie in with articles? If not, what is the point? --Susan118 ^talk 09:13, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep No valid reason provided for deletion of a list. This list of part of an entire structure of such lists, which provide info to WP readers. Lists are perfectly acceptable types of articles in WP. POV opinions about lists are not. Lists need improvement? Then work at improvement, not these deletions. Hmains (talk) 19:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then improve it. Be my guest. If you were to, which I know you won't, you'd see it's a virtual impossibility to properly source these lists. That's why no one has. What is the point of keeping useless, ugly material on wikipedia that just causes problems and will sit in limbo forever? Also, your argument is against the deletion of "all lists" - which is not what this AfD is about. We're talking about these specific lists. What does "lists are perfectly acceptable types of articles in WP" have anything to do with what I wrote in the nomination? Bulldog123 22:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: It should be mentioned that Hmains and I have been in numerous content disputes over ethnicity lists together. So, needless to say, his is not necessarily the most neutral of viewpoints. Bulldog123 22:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about POV and I've crossed out my comments that reflect POV. However, I still fail to see how any of these lists are useful. --Susan118 ^talk 20:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - Encyclopedic and sourced; constant proposals of deletion of quite reasonable ethnic-related articles is becoming increasingly disruptive. Badagnani (talk) 04:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where to start.. "encyclopedic" - No, it's not. "sourced" - No, it's not. "constant proposal of deletion ... become increasingly disruptive." You want to just get rid of the AfD process then? Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Badagnani This is relevant to bring up concerning Badagnani's radical view on ethnicity lists. Bulldog123 18:23, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The meaning, as usual is those in the group with articles in WP or obviously qualified, and where both the nationality and the Jewish identification is demonstrated in the article. If it is, the items are sourced. We could of course copy the references to that establishing them, though frankly it seems just a little silly, because that's what internal links are for. Bering a Jew in a particular Latin American country is very often culturally relevant, so the list is not a meaningless intersection. DGG (talk) 01:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since you haven't addressed anything I listed as a reason for deletion, I assume that you plan on sourcing these lists properly for every entry. I'm looking forward to seeing you there if the lists are kept. Bulldog123 05:31, 2 June 2009 (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.