Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stereotypes of West and Central Asians in the United States

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. Sandstein 17:23, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stereotypes of West and Central Asians in the United States

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

From the talk page:

“

Why are West and Central Asians grouped together into this article? None of the sources in the article makes mention of any such grouping.--Zoupan 03:49, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

”

I'm not finding evidence of such a grouping in any RS. This is a disjointed WP:SYNTH explaining several unrelated groups without connection. The Turkish section should be merged into Anti-Turkism. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 00:20, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This article is an odd expression of stereotyping in its own right. This seems to really be "Stereotypes of Arabs and Muslims in the US" . The problem is that there are non-Muslim, non-Arab West Asians, most obviously the Israelis, and by some accounts the Chaldeans. Central Asian=Muslim is probably more correct in that almost all Central Asians are Muslims, however a large number of Muslims are not Central Asian at all, but from Pakistan and India and Bangladesh which are all in South Asia. THen there are Indonesians and Malaysians. This is trying to build unity with no sourcing for the ideas presented.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:52, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:53, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:SYNTH is in place, but there is also the issue raised by John Pack Lambert. This article seems to exist just to blur a number of other articles into a summary page, where the summary page doesn't really blend its contents very well. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:07, 30 April 2018 (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.