Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Croats in France


 * 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  Materialscientist (talk) 06:08, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Croats in France

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication topic meets WP:GNG. Editor is creating many such articles including.
 * Articles for deletion/Austrians in France
 * Articles for deletion/Finnish people in France
 * Articles for deletion/Swedes in France
 * Articles for deletion/Albanians in France
 * Articles for deletion/Croats in France
 * Articles for deletion/Greeks in France
 * Articles for deletion/Kosovans in France
 * Articles for deletion/Dutch people in France
 * Articles for deletion/Irish people in France
 * Articles for deletion/Belarusians in France
 * Articles for deletion/Russians in France
 * Articles for deletion/Ukrainians in France J bh  Talk  11:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions.  J bh  Talk  11:33, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Croatia-related deletion discussions.  J bh  Talk  11:33, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    00:17, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment: Actually these kind of pages are encyclopedic, nothing wrong in such pages. But number of people should be "significant" enough to create article on them. In this case as per article 40,000 Croats are living in France, to decide wether it is significant or not, we have to compare this with population of France. I think not all pages mentioned above deserves deletion, maybe some. -- Human 3015   TALK   00:27, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Surely the test is not the size of the group, but rather the amount of coverage in reliable sources? That's likely to be related to group size, but some smaller groups could meet the notability guideline while some larger ones don't. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:56, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The issue is whether there is enough significant coverage for a stand alone article. Also, the topic definition is a bit off since it is including immigrants and those simply with 'ancestry'. This problem exists with all of these topics. J bh  Talk  13:17, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete for failing WP:GNG. Ceosad (talk) 18:06, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 02:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - is the equivalent of Croatian American - these articles are of encyclopedic value. —Мандичка YO 😜 03:25, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - not supported by in-depth coverage in independent sources. Not sure how someone can equate an incredibly well-sourced article with dozens of sources with this one. Can't see where an article about this particular group in this particular country is notable.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:16, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Delete all. WP:INDISCRIMINATE.  Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  15:53, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Delete useless articles. blocked account is creating many similar useless articles to nominate himself to admin.--ProvinceofIndonegra (talk) 05:13, 28 October 2015 (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.