Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Afro-Latinos

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 No Consensus A difficult call. The overall subject Afro-Latinos has sufficient coverage to claim notability. Thus as a list of [notable] Afro-Latinos, this list meets WP:List. The deletes have valid point about individual entries, referencing and whether or not they meet relatively clear inclusion criteria: [notable Afro Latinos]. Entries that cannot be verified thru reliable sources as Afro-Latinos can and should be removed from the list. All the arguments about relevancy, list size and otherstuff are not policy based and have been discounted. If an entry is unsourced or unsourceable based on inclusion criteria it can be removed. If this equates to 100% of the entries, then there is no list, otherwise there is a valid list. --Mike Cline (talk) 01:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Afro-Latinos[edit]

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

Large list of uncited genetic claims Off2riorob (talk) 19:38, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per norm Prsaucer1958 (talk) 20:06, 20 July 2010 (UTC) Having read [1], I have withdrawn my delete vote. I wonder if there are enough Irish-Latinos to form their own list? :)) Prsaucer1958 (talk) 23:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Believe it or not, that's not far-fetched. It would start with guys like Bernardo O'Higgins, who led Chile to independence, and Álvaro Obregón, one-time President of Mexico (Obregón being a form of O'Brian). Essentially, this is sourced to a list of black people who were born in Latin America. There's nothing genetic about being "Hispanic", which is purely an invention of the U.S. Census Bureau. Mandsford 20:46, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. —Jujutacular ^T · C 21:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —Jujutacular ^T · C 21:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTDIR and WP:V. Categorizing notable people by their ancestry is not relevant. List of Caucasians would be an equally ridiculous list. SnottyWong ^gossip 21:46, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Snotty Wong, in that case, maybe you should consider listing List of Asian Americans too? Maashatra11 (talk) 06:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep People of African descent are just as much of a minority in Latin America as they are in the United States. Somehow, we have entire categories (Category:Lists of African American people) and in no case do we require individual citations to prove the "blackness" of the persons (such as those listed in African Americans in the United States Congress). The practice, rather than a bunch of insulting footnotes, it's usually enough to cite a general source (in this case, [2]. I'm afraid that we've never lived in a world where the ancestry of people was "not relevant". Try nominating a list of African-Americans (or for that matter, Italian-Americans) and see how far you get. Mandsford 21:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It passes WP:LIST, also notable ethnic group. IJA (talk) 22:29, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Its a huge uncited list, as its uncited that is the issue, so lets move the uncited to the talkpage and people who support keeping the list can cite and replace it . Off2riorob (talk) 22:38, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, uncited list and questionable criteria for inclusion. Stifle (talk) 08:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO, "Uncited" entries can be removed or eventually cited; I have added a criteria for inclusion open to improvements. Regards, Maashatra11 (talk) 06:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"It'll eventually be cited" doesn't cut it for a BLP-related article. Stifle (talk) 18:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete uncited, and although it could be fixed, it won't be. Someone said "move all the uncited to the talk page" - that would be the whole article - same as deleting. I'll allow recreation, or reconsider this vote, if someone offers to maintain it and keep uncited stuff out. Otherwise might as well rename to "people who look afro-latino or have names that make wikipedians think they might be".--Scott Mac 14:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am holding back as this AFD is ongoing, but if this list is kept I am going to remove all the uncited claims, and then there will be nothing left. Off2riorob (talk) 10:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I offer to maintain the list, as you suggested. For the moment I removed some entries unbacked by reliable sources, and added sources proving Black ancestry to an article (Melissa de Sousa). You voted "Delete" but what you are actually saying is "Keep and improve" ("I'll allow recreation, or reconsider this vote, if someone offers to maintain it and keep uncited stuff out"). Please clarify your stance. Maashatra11 (talk) 06:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, it has to be a delete. There are hundreds of entries here, all unreferenced. Are you seriously going to reference them all?--Scott Mac 15:01, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Scott. I didn't vote to keep, but if this article survives AfD, I will try my best to reference all the entries, and delete the unverifiable entries. When I say "entries", I don't mean the individual ones on this list, but the individual articles. As previously stated, I have already added references to AfroLatino ancestry to an article. Regards, Maashatra11 (talk) 15:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Valid criteria for a list. Uncited, but we are discussing here the existence of the article, not its contents. Citations can be added. But not if the article doesn't exist. Herostratus (talk) 04:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Not good enough for a BLP list. This type of eventualism ignores the fact that it simply will not be referenced. Nothing has been till now.--Scott Mac 15:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think the references asserting Afro Latino affiliation don't necessarily have to be included in the list - they can be added to the individual articles. I'm sure I read it somewhere (in one of the policies or guidelines)... But on the other hand, the refs can be included, such as in List of Jews in sports and similar lists. Maashatra11 (talk) 15:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Claims need to be backed up by reliable sources. end of. Especially claims of genetic background and genome type, especially, specially, about anybody who is alive. Off2riorob (talk) 13:36, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - I really understand your concerns. But there are so many similar lists. I'm not trying to put up some WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument (I didn't vote and I'm quite ambivalent about the outcome of this AfD) but there are hundreds of similar lists. I don't really see what's the difference between this and, say, List of Asian Americans or List of black Britons. Maashatra11 (talk) 13:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        I just stumbled on this list, as an article I watch was added to the list and I had a look at it and it was a huge uncited weakly defined list and so here we are today. There may well be other lists in a similar state but I have yet to stumble on those... If this AFD helps to create improvements in other list that will also be a benefit. Keeping large weakly defined uncited lists is not IMO a benefit to the project. Off2riorob (talk) 23:10, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. May be worthy for a list, but the entire article is unsourced.--Pink Bull 01:57, 30 July 2010 (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.