Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/European Malays


 * 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. --Fang Aili talk 01:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

European Malays

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

This article consists of original research using a definition of Malay which is extremely broad, which has been shown in Talk:Malays (ethnic group) to be false and misleading. Caniago 00:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * delete as per Nom. (Caniago 01:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC))
 * Delete per nom, per Turkish Malays.  Gan fon  01:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Turish Malays reason.--155.144.251.120 01:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sources cited, personal home pages and the like, appear not to meet WP:RS. --Shirahadasha 03:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete These kind of articles are getting out of hand. --Chris S. 04:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep or redirect and expand
 * I have observed that there are categories such as Category:Eurasians and so on--categories and articles of people like this describing people of mixed descent. Malays with Arab, European and other racial blood lines are abundant throughout Malaysia and Singapore, and Arab-Malays means people of these two races stated above.


 * People with Arab bloodlines, and in fact there are a significant number of Malays with Arab bloodlines (see Category:Arab-Malays, of which many have made it up to the top ranks of society. Also, check out the article of Arab Singaporeans. Arab contribution to the SE Asian region is very significant. This fact should not be belittled.


 * Furthermore, much of the content here are provided with proper references. And unless there are policies and guidelines that explicitely point that such articles are prohibited, I see that there is no point in deleting these categories. I have noted that all of you people are of American or European background who lacked the understanding of Southeast-asian topics. Please read more about the Arab history of Singapore and Malaysia before reconsidering their notability. I believe that the Arab and European prescence in Malay Muslim SE Asia is as notable, if not more that the notability of Category:British Hongkongers, Indo (Eurasian) and the Principalía. Why didn't you all vote for deletion of that cat then? If you still think so otheriwse, please explain why. All of you might also want to take a look of my opinion at User talk:Fantastic4boy.


 * Still, I feel that it's best to ask the opinions of the Malays themselves. Being a non-Malay myself, I think it is the best that such issues are up to the Malays to decide. Mr Tan 06:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Mr Tan, who exactly are the Malay? There are a multitude of varying definitions ranging from everyone in South East Asia (the definition used by these articles), to more precise and academically correct definitions. The use of term Malay as a race was a misnomer first proposed in British colonial times. Its use is no longer relevant and it is factually incorrect. As others have mentioned above, any ethnic group articles which are created need to be supported by reliable sources. When one racial or ethnic group breeds with another this does not necessarily constitute a new ethnic group. Please supply reliable sources that the ethnic group European Malays exists and is notable. (Caniago 07:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC))

Likewise, an Eurasian or a Mestizo does not necessarily constitute an ethnic group. The word Malay can mean the people of the Malay Archipelago or the Malay ethnic group used in Malaysia and Singapore, but the intrebreeding between a Malay and European/Arab is just like the interbreeeding of an Asian+European=Eurasian.

Look up the book sources on the Eurasians in Malaysia/Singapore/Indonesia (see also Papia Kristang.) You might want to take a look at some of the book sources:. The book lists out many notable Eurasians with Malay parentage.

If you are here to ask for a change of a new term, say Arab-Indoensian or whatever, a redirect to the article from Arab Malay is more than enough, not a deletion. Mr Tan 07:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll repeat again. These articles are about ethnic groups, as defined ethnologists. Just because one ethnic groups mates with another does not mean a new independent ethnic group is formed. Eurasian seems a commonly used and accepted term, but is European Malays? Please supply reliable sources that the ethnic group European Malays exists and is notable. Wikipedia does not allow original research. (Caniago 07:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC))
 * BTW, I put the term "european malays" -wikipedia into Google and got 12 hits. This article certainly seems like original research to me. (Caniago 08:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC))


 * For your information, this article is edited in parallel to Eurasian (mixed ancestry), Kristang people and Halvsie. Both Eurasian and Arab-Malays are not ethnic groups. There is no rule that we cannot write about articles of terminologies on interracial affairs. And if you want to know the notablity of arab malays in SE Asia, check out the Syed Alsagoff family in Singapore (Check the History of Singapore).


 * Nor is there any original research. The sources are directly found in Arab malays, . The references at Arab Singaporeans are equally reliable sources. Also, there is no need for you to be so rigid as to type in the exact terminology of "european malays". On the contary, there are also a lot of articles on this topic--eg:.


 * Or, otherwise, we could perhaps redirect this article to Arabs in Southeast Asia, Arabs in Malaysia or something like that. I can accept something like Category:British Hongkongers instead of category:Arab-Malays where all notable of part or full British decsnet are being classified into here, or Arab Singaporeans which people of part or full arab descent are being discussed.


 * However, I must note that deleting content totally like this is destabilising the consistency and all of you are contesting the validity of articles on interracial affairs like Macanese people, halvise and so on. I can't get it, if you mean that these content are really deleted. Mr Tan 15:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I would not have an issue with any notable information being rolled into a more general article such as a list of notable Malay people, or notable Malaysian people Caniago 20:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)]]


 * Strong Delete - per other X Malays (see Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_19 that I assume there will be similar article like this). This is not a notable reason, only to state one person get married with a Malay person and you then created WP article for that? What about Turkish Malays married with Arab Malays, would you want to create Turkish Arab Malays Malays article? There are thousands of combination if you want to create this similar article. Come on! Please be reasonable. These X Malays articles are baseless. They are not supported by academic terminologies. Tell me if there are reliable sources from anthropologists saying these kind of race definition. &mdash; Indon ( reply ) &mdash; 09:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Turkish Malays reasoning. Terence Ong 11:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete OR definition of a nationality.14:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom SatuSuro 15:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:N Topar 17:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, I'd like to compliment the author (correction: authors) on the work done, but I think the subject is too broad and undersourced. But this could be broken up into separate articles, with each one not only more specific but with more content. European Malays in either Southeast Asia or Malaysia, for instance. The criteria should be: Is there a definable set of characteristics that distinguishes these people from people in general in the nation where they live. If Austrian-Malays and Italian-Malays together have an important set of characteristics that they share and that distinguish them, and if it can be sourced, it's an article. If the important distinctions are not shared but nevertheless present in each group (distinguishing them from the general population), then we've got two articles. Of course, each article needs to be substantiated, first off by proving that others believe the specified ethnic group exists and by specifying what cultural characteristics make it distinct. I especially disagree with Indon's comments above: It's not the actual combination of ancestors that counts, it's the cultural distinctiveness.ShivaDaDestroyer 20:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Wait. There are a multiple number of references in this article, which proves the existence of the variants of this mixed racial community. Secondly, this article is elaborated and expanded relatively well, comparable to the standard of Arab Singaporeans. I have checked the references on this article, and nonetheless variants of communities of euromalays do exist. One example is trying the yahoo hits on the euromalay papia kristang commune in Melaka. This article is nonetheless serves something like a conclusion of the variants of mixed euro"malay" communities-between mixed marriages of the european and various groups on the malay archipelago. Look at the sections of this article, which links of to a main article. I still harbor some doubts as to why this article should be deleted, for I need an explanation on this point. Even if we create a category linking the articles of Spanish Filipinos, Filipino Mestizos and Indo into a category, say something like a name of "Mixed communities in SE Asia" or something like that, ultimately all these articles are brought together like in one umbrella. The content of this article here are derived from the properly cited articles (stated above). However, as with Arab malays, I do agree that an article like European Malaysians could be created on grounds of sufficient notability and references.

(Oh, forget it. I think all of you will think I am uttering some baseless rubbish). Mr Tan 03:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment {[:Arab Singaporeans]] maybe a problem - the article is expanded but there is a real problem with the sources/references.... It is not a good example of an article that can be compared with for a 'standard' SatuSuro 03:37, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, but revise -- User:Matthewprc14:26, 23 January 2007 (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.