Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of the term Latino


 * 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   no consensus. There is clearly no consensus to delete the page, I leave it up to the participants in the debate to decide on the article's talk page if the article should be redirected, merged, or otherwise repurposed. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Criticism of the term Latino

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


 * Delete this isn't an article but rather an essay written to push a POV. It contains original research and in particular violates WP:SYN in that it uses sources solely to push a POV. Jersey Devil (talk) 23:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. One-sided POV fork. Anything that is useful should be moved to Latino.   Will Beback    talk    23:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What parts are useful and what aren't? If any of it is useful then the article should be cleaned up/merged/redirected/moved/etc, not deleted. ZabMilenko 06:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a discussion over the existence of an article under that title, not about the contents. Merging is fine, but I don't think we need to retain the title as a redirect.   Will Beback    talk    19:11, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:BEFORE says (in bold even) "if the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for AfD.". Normal editing does in fact include moving/renaming which anybody can do.  ZabMilenko 19:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm suggesting that we delete the title and move any good material to whatever existing article seems appropriate, most likely Latino. I don't think it can be fixed in the current title, and I don't see a need to have a separate article on this topic. That's just my opinion.   Will Beback    talk    20:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. The difficulty of choosing which "term" is "correct" is problematic enough to deserve research by the white house (per one of the refs).  Whether or not it fails WP:SYN is iffy because the refs are hard to check. ZabMilenko 06:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: my last edit summary was wrong, hit down arrow key one too many times on autocomplete. ZabMilenko 06:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and repurpose. It has obvious POV issues, but I think there is also much good material that could be repurposed into a Names of Latin Americans article, to be modeled on the Native American name controversy and Names of Syriac Christians articles.--Pharos (talk) 12:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and repurpose. As I see many people feel the article as biased which is not. There is no single original research since everything has a source and quotations. What I propose is to remove the last quotation which is pretty redundant and to change the name to either Latino/Hispanic naming controversy (belonging to the naming controversies category) or like Pharos says Names of Latin Americans.--Scandza (talk) 14:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. This article was solely created to enforce the creators opinion on people. He actually compares the word Latino to the word Nigger! A search for the articles "Praise of the term Latino", "Critisism of the word Hispanic", "Praise of the term Hispanic" and similarly a quick search of other ethnic groups with related articles such as "Criticism of the word African American" returns no results. Both the praise and criticism for both terms are effectively covered on pages such as Latino, Latin American, Hispanic, Latino American, Hispanic American. etc. This soapbox must be deleted. CartelCacique (talk) 18:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The guy above is very passionate and doesn't provide hard proofs that the article is biased as he says. I challenge him to find any single phrase that is not sustained by genuine sources. As for the perceived WP:SYN violations I have to accept that the first versions were unbalanced and maybe forced. I changed and improved many things and I included enough external links to major newspapers and other websites. Like I said before the article could be repurposed into a different article covering the criticism of both the Hispanic and Latino ethnonyms.--Scandza (talk) 16:26, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep/Merge The references and external links indicates that "the criticism of the term Latino" is not original research or the opinion of one user. Merging the article is a good idea, but for that we must preserve the information, removing any POV or original research. -- J mundo 21:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Merge back to Latino. Clearly there are differences of opinion about the use of this word. Both sides should be covered in one article for fairness. There is no article "Support for the the term Latino." Northwestgnome (talk) 14:49, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SYN. Stifle (talk) 08:12, 8 June 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.