Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Rohingya villages

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. I agree with the nominator that it may be difficult, if not impossible, to quantify exactly what qualifies as a Rohingya village, so this list veers dangerously close to WP:OR. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:28, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of Rohingya villages

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has multiple serious issues, as the templates at the beginning explain it is completely unreferenced and possibly original research. This article also fails WP:LISTCRUFT as no actuall criteria is laid out for what exactly IS a Rohingya village? Is it a village with a Rohingya majority? A village were all the inhabitants are Rohingya? A village with mixed demographics? Villages that use to be Rohingya?

Also due to the ongoing persecution of the Rohingya many have fled, which means that many villages that were historically Rohingya might now be abandoned or occupied by other ethnic groups. There is no way to quantifiable access the population of Rohingya villages as they are not recognized by the Burmese government thus accurate population statistics are nearly impossible to come by. I also tired looking about ten of these villages up on google maps an most did not appear, which leeds me to doubt if they actually exist or are misnamed. Also this page was started by a series of IP editor(s) and each one 1, 2, 3, 4 have a troubled history on Wikipedia.

Lastly even if the WP:DINC argument comes up, I would argue that this article is still unfit to stand alone, if it is not deleted it should be merged with Rohingya villages. We don't have List of jewish villages pre-holocaust for example, that content is in larger articles. Inter&anthro (talk) 03:01, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Myanmar-related deletion discussions. Inter&anthro (talk) 03:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Inter&anthro (talk) 03:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:10, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:14, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE and WP:NOR. Ajf773 (talk) 09:08, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This article has already been nominated for deletion in the past, although at the time it has a different name (hence why I didn't notice it) as well as it was over eleven years ago. The previous deletion discussion can be seen here. Inter&anthro (talk) 21:26, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nomination. Phyo WP (message) 06:07, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - original research and fails WP:GNG anyway Spiderone 23:31, 10 February 2017 (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.