Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cantonese independence


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  23:56, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Cantonese independence

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

Seems non-notable political movement. Article created by a new user with clear political agenda. Renata (talk) 15:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep --The Cantonese independence movement has existed since the 1930's: 1, 2. I can't find any confirmation that the movement is active, except one sentence from this book (scroll down to #27). I don't know if the lack of sources to establish notability of the present movement is due to the Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China. Finally, any POV concerns can be addressed through editing.= Change to Delete per Flopsy Mopsy. --J.Mundo (talk) 00:15, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete--Almost no prominent (Western) sources can be found to support this as an independence movement. In order for an article of such topic to exist, somewhat reputed sources needs to be cited.  Juding from the two sources presented by J.Mundo above, if the article was to be about historical events in the early 1910s instead of current movement, more needs to be elarboated.--Balthazarduju (talk) 16:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The creator of the article Nationalist320 has added two sources to the article. However, none of them are about "Cantonese Independence", the issues concerning with it or if there is indeed an active movement like this.  The cited two sources are also incomplete, as there is only a title of the article and of the publication; no given authors, no page numbers and no links.--Balthazarduju (talk) 07:11, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Article is OR. It was created by a new editor who wants to use WP as a soapbox.  Check his contrib history.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * User:HongQiGong, I suggest that you stop pretending that Cantonese people are somehow ethnic Chinese, particularly on your user page. Otherwise, I will report you (so that your agenda can be exposed once and for all) and I will make sure that your user page gets deleted! Nationalist320 (talk) 05:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Personal attack is very not nice. You can post your comments but don't go after users and attack them in this manner.--Balthazarduju (talk) 07:11, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete = Wikipedia is not the place for propaganda. Article is a WP:SOAPBOX full of original research and wishful thinking, from an editor whose contributions show that he was screaming madly at other Chinese editors before and after he wrote the article.  I can't tell if this is an angry and misguided nationalist or a really clever troll, but in either case the article is propaganda and original research, and needs to go.  An article on the early 1900s independence movement would be a good idea; however, I don't know enough to write it. :)  In any case, the title of such an article wouldn't be "Cantonese independence," it would either be the (transliterated) Cantonese name of that century-ago independence movement, or it would be the term used by Western historians when referring to it.  Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 00:03, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we're dealing with a very clever troll. He claims to want anyone who goes against the UN Declaration on Human Rights killed, which means he's either trolling or he's advocating killing people for interfering with your right to take a vacation (see Article 24).  --Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 05:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Wow, this is unsourced from start to finish. "Today, few people are even aware of the existence of such a movement."  This ain't helping things.  Mandsford (talk) 02:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - A subject of this magnitude would need to be well-sourced, and there are no sources here at all.--Danaman5 (talk) 06:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - After reading through the article, it cites very little sources actually relating to the movement, but saying how the Cantonese are different from other chinese. And also, suffers from strong pov such as ''Determined to subjugate and enslave the Cantonese people, Qin armies, victorious from their earlier conquests, advanced on modern-day Guangdong and began one of the world's worst genocides.
 *  and Supporters of Cantonese independence still continue to have an extremely difficult time convincing the wider community that the Cantonese people were victims of genocides at the hands of the Chinese.'', and I haven't found anything calling the Guangdong invasion a genocide. Despite having no links to support it, putting anything in the view of non-cantonese people, or Also, seems to be used for Propaganda and full of OR. Deavenger (talk) 05:10, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete lol, please, I can't be the only one who thinks we are dealing with a troll here...Oh, ok. Thx Flopsy Mopsy. TheAsianGURU (talk) 23:27, 19 January 2009 (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.