Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Multiracialism

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, since original research issue has been addressed, all this article needs is to cite the sources into the article. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 16:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Multiracialism[edit]

Original research from a free content website. If any notable use is found it can merged with multiculturalism.YVNP (talk) 11:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 15:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed. Multiracialism is a materially different policy than multiculturalism. Mcarling (talk) 18:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: if sources are added that verify what is said in the article then I would say keep but as it stands now it is unsourced and OR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Woland37 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as stated by Woland, the article seems to be encyclopaedic, but is in desperate need of references and notability. Give it this, then I will change my vote to keep!--Sallicio ^{$\color {Red}\oplus$} 08:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. This article needs cleanup, not deletion. The concept of multiracialism is apparently well-known and much used, as evidenced by the 1,170 (!) Google Scholar hits[1], 39 of which have multiracialism in the title[2]. There are similar results for Google Books and News. Please, a bad article on a good subject is not bound for deletion but for improvement. Fram (talk) 12:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Fram. The article's only flaw is talking nearly exclusively about Singapore; that text is not even bad text, it's just not balanced coverage of multiracialism elsewhere. If we must, we could always cut out the stuff about Singapore to make a shorter, more balanced stub, but that doesn't require deletion of the article. Mango juice^talk 15:59, 15 February 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.