Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhumihar (2nd nomination)


 * 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 Speedy Keep per SNOW (non admin closure). Consensus forms that AfD is not the place for sorting NPOV issues. WilliamH (talk) 09:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Bhumihar
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

There are whole sections devoted to propaganda nonsense and POV. Satisfies criteria for speedy deletion under Blatant advertising (G11) and Recreation of deleted material(G4). Also see WP:NOT. I also suspect the involvement of banned user (User:Ranvir Sena in the guise of an anonymous IP (59.96.9.190)- Ravichandar 02:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep Appears to be a very notable subject with multiple reliable sources. POV and propaganda can easily be fixed outside of AfD. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 02:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment This article also looks nothing like the version that got nuked in February. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 02:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * True, this version looks nothing like the previous version which was deleted but it is being used for the same purpose and intent i.e. to glorify the Bhumihar community. Have a look at this: Bhumihar. This section contains short biographies of "certain Bhumihars". While there might be adequate references to vouch for the contributions of these individuals, there arent any to establish that they are Bhumihars in the first place. Besides, it should be kept in mind that the Bhumihar community is behind the establishment of the Ranvir Sena and hence such articles used for the glofication of Bhumihars are highly controversial. I wouldnt be surprised if this article is this article evolves into a piece of Bhumihar propaganda and is cited in online forums or in articles in Bhumihar websites praising the "greatness of the Bhumihar race".- Ravichandar  02:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The problems you're bringing up all sound like they can be fixed without AfD being involved. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 02:40, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep per Ten Pound Hammer (and his otters). Anturiaethwr (talk) 02:27, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep This AfD appears to be the result of a content dispute between the nom and the IP user. Notice these edit summaries:  especially . I'm not taking sides as to who's right or wrong in it, but content disputes shouldn't be settled by deleting the article. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 06:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not indulging in any disputes but anyone from India would agree to the fact that these anonymous IPs have been indulging in POV-pushing. This is also a highly sensitive topic that is being covered here. As I said earlier, Wikipedia's standards should be maintained. Wikipedia articles should be downgraded to the level of providing content for propaganda pamphlets of terrorist organizations.- Ravichandar 07:02, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. This is not the place to sort out NPOV issues. Read WP:AfD: "If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for AfD." utcursch | talk 08:31, 12 April 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.