Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistanis in Singapore

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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 06:12, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistanis in Singapore[edit]

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

When this article was created in 2008, it was listed as 'unencyclopaedic' and 'unreferenced', and lacking notability. This holds true today: The vast majority of content on here is either unsourced, unverified, or obsolete; removing all unsourced content would make this article a stub or completely blank. Most of the content on this article is Original Research. Several editors, over the course of the last few years, have had to repeatedly remove OR and dubious information. I would like to list some examples of OR that currently exist on this article:

1. "Pakistanis living in Johor Bahru also use Singapore for their transit route for international travel, because of cheaper travel cost and shorter travel time duration travelling from the Singapore Changi Airport, as opposed to the nearest major Malaysian international airport in Kuala Lumpur, the Kuala Lumpur International Airport."

2. "Pakistanis in Singapore generally come from a middle-class background, with the majority working in engineering and business fields. Most Pakistani groceries, foodstuff, and restaurants can be found in Little India."

Furthermore, the existence of the article is dubious. The article documents an expatriate/foreign worker demographic in Singapore, yet this particular group is dwarfed by larger and more established groups, like the Bangladeshis (who number in the tens of thousands), the British and Australians, the Americans, etc - yet no articles exist for these groups, nor have they been added to the 'Ethnicity in Singapore' sidebar box. The simple reason for this is that the 'Ethnicity in Singapore' sidebar box generally documents Singaporean (citizen) ethnic groups, not expatriate or foreign worker demographics. There are no articles documenting the 'French in Singapore', 'Americans in Singapore' et al. even though these foreigners are more established.

I would like to request that this article be deleted - even if someone can come up with a premise for its existence, there is still not enough verified information to turn this article into anything more than a stub. Tiger7253 (talk) 04:03, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 09:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 09:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:ATD. If article contain OR, it should be either removed or cited but deleting an entire article does not make sense. There's a community of Pakistani expatriates living in Singapore and some of the community members are notable (even by WP standards). This is a valid encyclopedic topic, I believe. WP:BlowUpTNT. --Saqib (talk) 09:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Saqib: If I were to remove the OR, the article would be a stub. There would be very little content. As a matter of fact, I shall remove OR right now to prove my point. There are no articles for Bangladeshi migrant workers, American, British, or several Western expatriates in Singapore - these communities outnumber the Pakistani expatriate community. It does not feel notable enough. Tiger7253 (talk) 10:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Szzuk (talk) 09:01, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kirbanzo (talk) 18:00, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - A couple of additional potential sources: 50 years of Indians in Singapore - Pakistanis in Singapore; Living in Singapore. Bluntly, if the primary authors wanted to add something I'd suggest the blurring of Indian/Pakistani populations within Singapore.

An interesting distinct point here is masses of books and journal articles talk about "Indians in Singapore", before lengthy footnotes point out they actually mean India, Pakistan & Bangladesh. Now this may or may not support this bit (vs being a section in the Indians in Singapore article), I couldn't make up my mind on it. However the top bit might well suffice on its own. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:07, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per other users. M A A Z T A L K 19:32, 9 May 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.