Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/African American contemporary issues


 * 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 - by consensus. -- VS talk 08:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

African American contemporary issues

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Why does this article exist? There's no article on Asian-American contemporary issues or Hispanic American contemporary issues. Also, I think people already know what the issues are already. There's no reason for this article to exist. Fclass (talk) 16:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't see any problem with an article about the things African Americans find important issues, not that it would be an easy article to write or take care of. Northwestgnome (talk) 17:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Doesn't meet NPOV, large number of unreferenced (and even if they were, contentious) assertions. Cannot see how this could ever be NPOV and encyclopedic. MadScot (talk) 17:54, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - the articles African American, African American history, African American culture etc. are suitable places for discussing contemporary Africa American issues. In fact, these articles already discuss some of these contemporary issues, in a much neutral and balanced way IMO. That implies that I would delete this article, and not merge the content due to the NPOV issues. Голубое сало/Blue Salo (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete an article about "issues" is unnecessary and a duplicate. We don't have articles on Canada issues, for example, because the article Canada, if properly written, must cover issues related to Canada. So an article just about issues is inherently a duplicate. --Rividian (talk) 22:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Careful with we don't have an article on .... Jjamison (talk) 00:39, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Careful with kneejerk reactions... I explained why an article on that topic would be a bad idea. Do you have any problem with my logic, or did you just detect some keywords in my comment and feel the need to make a trite link? --Rividian (talk) 17:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.