Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Pakistani sentiment


 * 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, we don't delete articles for violating WP:NPOV, WP:OR, unless that cannot be fixed (Please remember that WP:ATT is superceded by WP:NPOV). As far as I can see, there are valid multiple, reliable, secondary sources available on the subject and are provided on the article. I don't see how this fails WP:NEO either. (Sum of all the views on this AfD presented by the participants) The delete arguments are unconvincing. &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick   {C}  15:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Anti-Pakistani sentiment

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I submit this article for examination and possible deletion owing to strong violations of WP:NPOV, WP:OR, WP:ATT, WP:NEO. Even though several sources have been provided, none of them attribute to the assertions made in the article, which are grossly biased and original research. Rama's arrow 21:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 *  Delete , if after reading this article for the third time I would have come to the conclusion that this article conforms WP:NPOV I would have said keep, It is not the theme but it is the unbalanced way that makes me advocate deleting it Alf Photoman  23:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, extremely heavy cleanup. For every major nation Foo there is the anti-Foo sentiment, so the topic is valid. Contrary to the nominator, I see that the provided references contain such topics as "demonization of Pakistan", etc., although I can say nothing whether they match the wikipedia text. `'mikka 23:43, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletions.   --   &rArr; bsnowball  09:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Hello I dont know If im allowed to post here, but I daresay I find it somewhat presumptuous of Ramma's arrow to mark my contribution for deletion simply because he found the content offensive, I have provided almost 33 different sources and I will expand the article in the future, if you have time help me do that, dont delete informative articles with sources just because you dont like them. S Seagal 09:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Statements such as ... zealous anti-Pakistan sentiment that exists in a majority of Hindus, Hindu chauvinism spurred by anti-Pakistan sentiment has grown and with it extremist religious parties like the BJP.[27] However anti-Pakistan sentiment is so deeply embedded into the psyche of the Hindu faithful that it is not confined to Hindu chauvinists alone do give an insight into your POV... this vitriol doesnt deserve an iota of server space on Wiki servers..  Amey Aryan DaBrood&#169; 15:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I struck my delete above, If you want to work on the article you should have a chance to fix it. But remember, we are a tertiary source therefore WE DO NOT HAVE AN OPINION and no matter how we feel about a theme we must be neutral Alf Photoman  15:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Other countries have similar pages List of anti-ethnic and anti-national terms. Are we going to delete those also? IP198 19:43, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Per Category:Anti-national_sentiment. There are many are anti-national sentiment articles. However, the article still needs to be cleaned up and follow a neutral point of view. Besides, to all those Hindutvaadis out there, on the same premise an Anti-Indian sentiment can be created so don't get so emotional :p GizzaChat  &#169; 07:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - NationalORcruft. Baka man  00:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The topic is a valid one and one on which there appear to be sufficient sources to write a good article.  However, the article as written has serious POV issues.  In principle, it can be fixed and the existing sources (if not the current text) would provide a good starting point.  Due to my ambivalence, I will remain neutral.  -- Black Falcon 00:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I initially intended to remain neutral on the issue, but I just noticed that the article does not have a talk page. These issues should have been raised on the talk page first as an attempt at resolution and/or improvement.  The topic is a valid one for an article, so I recommend keeping and starting a discussion on the article's talk page.  -- Black Falcon 00:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a valid topic, though the current article is badly flawed.  The article itself is already tagged for verification and NPOV checking.  I've started a talk page for the article, and deleted the OR/non-NPOV section on AP sentiment in India.  --Clay Collier 02:11, 12 March 2007 (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.