Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Auckland Stereotypes


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 15:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Auckland Stereotypes
Stereotypes are not encyclopedic, and this article is not referenced. A similar section in the Auckland article was removed earlier; see and Talk:Auckland. Delete.-gadfium 08:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete very POV driven. I can see some merit in a referenced section of Sterotypes in the main Auckland section but those references would have to be pretty darn reliable. 205.157.110.11 09:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, lack of references. -- Avenue 11:16, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Some of it is true, but I think some of it is covered in Bombay Hills. on bombay hills article, it does say that the hills are an imaginary border between auckland and the rest of the country. But to say that most aucklanders drive SUV's or gas guzzlers is really a biased comment. --Ageo020 11:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Stereotypes can indeed be encyclopaedic; however, this article cites no sources and appears to be original research. A well-sourced, well-written article about the stereotypes commonly applied to Aucklanders (assuming that these stereotypes are worth knowing about) would not go astray, but this is not it.  fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 12:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete POV, unverified, and possibly OR. Paddles TC 13:39, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:V - it can be recreated if reliable sources are found. WilyD 14:10, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete —  Exactly per nom; took the words out of my mouth - GI e n 15:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Where documentable, stereotypes are encyclopaedic. WilyD 16:04, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Absolutely I agree 110%. However this article is completely unsourced and to be honest I am not sure where one could find sources sufficient to meet WP:V on this subject. I have looked online and the pages online all seemed to be a mirror of our Jafa article which obviously doesn't get us very far. I will give it some thought and have a hunt around however - GI e n 16:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I also seriously doubt Aukland Stereotypes will ever pass WP:V. This one certainly doesn't WilyD 16:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. The only source shown is a Wikipedia article. What it needs is verifiable material from reliable sources such as books, journals, magazines and newspapers showing that these are stereotypes of Auckland held by other New Zealanders. Capitalistroadster 23:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletions.   -- Capitalistroadster 23:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect to Jafa. --Midnighttonight Remind me to do my uni work rather than procrastinate on the internet 03:26, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. —Michael Hays 16:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. —Michael Hays 16:51, 22 August 2006 (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.