Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Altaic peoples


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  00:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Altaic peoples

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

The whole page is original research, as can be seen by the complete absence of even a single reference. There is a hypothesis for the existance of a language family, Altaic languages and although the majority of linguists these days reject the hypothesis, there's no denying it and that article fully merits its place on Wikipedia. This article, Altaic peoples, is another matter. Nobody, not even those suggesting a relationship between Altaic languages has ever suggested an ethnic group such as Altaic people. Including ethnic groups as differen as Turks, Azeris, Mongolians, Koreans, Japanese and many others into the same ethnic group begs belief. While the article is fairly long, all it consists of is a short intro claiming that this ethnic group exists and then a long lists of people supposedly included in it, togheter with a lot of pictures taken from the different people pages. That not even a single source is presented in the whole article is rather telling but not very surprising, as nobody has ever put forward such an ethnic group. The page is original research from the beginning to the end JdeJ (talk) 14:53, 29 November 2008 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 09:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong delete Absolutely no source, and the author went nuts with pictures.


 * Comment. Indeed, nobody has suggested an ethnic group such as Altaic people, and neither does this article. The title is not "Altaic people" but "Altaic peoples": some peoples are Altaic. In that sense this is very comparable to Germanic peoples, Slavic peoples, Iranian peoples, and Turkic peoples – there is no ethnic group such as Turkic people, but there are many ethnic groups that happen to be Turkic. --Lambiam 00:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as OR, possibly Redirect to Altaic languages. &mdash;/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 01:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - Sorry to disagree here, but it seems that Google Scholar found quite a few references - cites and more than a few complete scholarly books dedicated to this Genre, as shown here .  Likewise, did anyone bother to check the history of this article? ShoesssS Talk 05:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - The fact that you've found such evidence, yet neither the proposing editor nor "delete" voters did so, is more than a little troubling. Badagnani (talk) 05:44, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge - I've seen no convincing evidence that this substantial page should be deleted, nor evidence that the proposing editor or "delete" voters have researched the issue thoroughly. I'd like to see "Discussion" used before such a proposal is made. Badagnani (talk) 05:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep with the suggestion that editors should try to find references if they are in doubt about deleting something. If there are readily found references, the whole premise of the AfD fails. Collect (talk) 12:19, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep per comment by Shoessss, references for Altaic people can clearly be found, the article itself just needs some. It should just be tagged rather than being AFD'd  Pahari Sahib  21:03, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep As Shoessss shows, ample sources exist and the nimonation is based on an incorrect premise. Edward321 (talk) 00:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Warrington (talk) 14:21, 8 December 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.