Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quilts of the Underground Railroad

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, discuss possible name change for article. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 22:52, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quilts of the Underground Railroad[edit]

Original research. Salad Days 06:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and cleanup, it does have citations, though not in Wikipedia's typical style. This seems like a notable enough subject as implied by the article and its cites. Andrew Levine 08:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would rather this be deleted as the article itself states:

This theory is not supported by any documentary evidence, such as slave memoirs, Works Progress Administration oral history interviews of escaped slaves, or abolitionist accounts of the Underground Railroad OR extant quilts. It is based solely on a one person's oral history as related in the book, Hidden in Plain View. With no supporting evidence, the secret quilt code, as described in that book, is not accepted by quilt historians as accurate.

The quilt "theory" was bandied about for a while before it was widely publicized in the 1999 book and since then many e.g. black history month programs treat it as factual, but there are few historians who see it as anything but an ex post facto interpretation that can never be proven. The article would have to treat that as a fair POV from the beginning. IMO this is fake history, as much about contemporary African-American culture as anything. --Dhartung | Talk 10:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a reason to delete it. What people believe is often more important than what actually happened, since beliefs often motivate actions. If it's a popular theory, then it should be kept, true or not.--Prosfilaes 14:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then rename/move to Underground Railroad quilt controversy.--Dhartung | Talk 19:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Bec-Thorn-Berry 11:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, popular theory as per Dhartung.--Prosfilaes 14:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Prosfilaes. -Toptomcat 18:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Move per Dhartung -- Bpmullins | Talk 19:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Clean up I came to Wikipedia looking for information, after dipping into "Hidden in Plain View" and having my doubts about it all. WP should definitely provide information about the theory, as well as information about the rebuttals, which I found most illuminating, even if it is not very well organized and not written in WP style!!! --Slp1 03:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep mainly on the grounds that it will be looked for, considering the extremely well known book. Adjust POV of courseDGG 05:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

so we should make this, and Hidden in Plain View a redirect to Underground Railroad quilt controversy? Salad Days 06:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely keep -- more than a few details of human history are not well documented and WP needs to help such things see the light of day so they can be mulled over by more people. katewill

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.