Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Australian Brazilian

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. No information on subject, not enough information to merge. Malinaccier (talk) 02:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Brazilian[edit]

Australian Brazilians are a really small population in Brazil, in fact its only 1,415 people. ~~They have not contribute to Brazil's history and culture, and they are nowhere in Brazilian society. Why is there a page for an unnotable community? This is such a useless page!~~ Lehoiberri (talk) 18:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Portions of this nomination have been struck through by VirtualSteve (VS) as per comments below - please make a nomination on good faith without causing needless offence.--VS ^talk 02:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Expand if possible, delete otherwise. GO-PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 19:12, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge To article on immigration in Brasil. --Ecoleetage (talk) 20:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge The info probably should just go to a table in another article. If there's enough material, eventually it will be added and the article can break out of the generic immigration article. --Gimme danger (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, insufficient content for a separate article, no sources. This is, however, one in a series of poorly-worded nominations based on an assumption that an ethnic grouping's notability is based on its size, and on whether the page is useful or not. I strongly suggest the nominator read WP:N before making another nomination. --Dhartung | Talk 20:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: I'd also like to caution Lehoiberri slightly; his remarks could be considered offensive. Ironho lds 20:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Bduke (talk) 00:12, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge data as suggested by Ecoleetage. Agree with caution to nominator and explanation that was placed on his talk page - and have acted boldly and struck through offensive non-important part of the nomination.--VS ^talk 02:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or at least wait a bit longer. It was only written a few days ago - with further research more items could be added to make it worthwhile. Kransky (talk) 10:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to a demographic article any material that can be attribute to reliable sources. I agree with the nomination in principal about these racial grouping articles which are prone to OR, Synths and questionable notability. Articles of this ilk should be considered in context of contributions to a society that makes the racial group as a whole notable. Gnan garra 12:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There's nothing here to merge. Moondyne 02:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree with user Moondyne. Besides, it can't be expanded due to lack of (relevant) information. DutchDevil (talk) 16:45, 17 June 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.