Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cagot


 * 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. joe deckertalk to me 19:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Cagot

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not meet Wikipedia standard for notability. Spin0zist5 (talk) 04:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Quite notable. Cf., e.g., articles cited. OP is CAG. Del3uze666 (talk) 05:53, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Eh? Looks like perfectly decent article on an important subject.  Strong keep. PatGallacher (talk) 12:32, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep A well-referenced article on an important and little-known historical topic. Cullen328 (talk) 14:36, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Keep: The subject is definitely notable.Philip.marshall (talk) 08:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The subject's notability seems obvious, and its references to reliable sources seem more than adequate to establish notability.  The subject seems to have clear historical importance. 1000+ Google Scholar hits.  25000+ books hits. Nominator has few edits outside of this AfD.  Suggest speedy or snow keep.  - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep- Referenced well enough to establish notability. Tarheel95 (talk) 16:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable subject, explained well by article. The current number of references and range of reliable sources used might be inadequate if we were considering the article for GA, but they are significantly more than enough to justify its inclusion in Wikipedia. PWilkinson (talk) 18:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Snow keep. Sources make the article easily pass WP:GNG. The bibliography of the French article is impressive, which reflects the amount of google books and google scholars search results. Comte0 (talk) 18:12, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - thoroughly referenced. Subject of significant external commentary including http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-last-untouchable-in-europe-878705.html. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgaffney2000 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 31 March 2011 (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.