Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harris Surname DNA Project


 * 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 all. Jayjg (talk) 21:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Harris Surname DNA Project

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I am also listing these articles:

These are non-notable DNA projects. FamilyTreeDNA currently has 6,733 different 'surname projects'. Such projects are administrated by "unpaid volunteers who have an interest in the history and genealogy of a particular haplogroup, lineage, geographic region, or surname". Anyone can start and administrate their own surname project.

Although the 'Harris' article lists a long bibliography, almost all of the sources date long before FamilyTreeDNA was founded (1999); none of these sources appear to be about the project at all. Likewise, the weblinks listed fail to show that the articles meet our notability criteria; they just link back to themselves. All the actual genetic data comes from the project itself, not from an independent source. GoogleBooks turns up nothing on these projects (except on LLC book mirrored from Wikipedia).

Fails WP:NOTE: no independent sources address the subject directly. Issues with WP:ABOUTSELF and WP:RELIABLESOURCES. Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 08:42, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete all If, as per the link, anyone can create one of these projects, then they are basically little different from any other user-generated content, such as blogs. We don't have articles on blogs unless they prove to be notable per the WP:GNG; by the same token, without substantial third-party reliable sources, these are not appropriate for inclusion. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 09:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete all Everyone is related to everyone, if traced back far enough. The articles in question describe nothing notable: Harris is a common surname, and a bunch of people named Harris are interested in their ancestors—yet nothing of consequence is available to be added to the article. Same for the other articles nominated: they do not satisfy WP:GNG. The references merely describe the obvious fact that everyone has a lot of ancestors, and people are interested in their ancestors, and are prepared to pay websites for generic information. Johnuniq (talk) 09:28, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 13:48, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Harris_(surname). --Legis (talk - contribs) 05:10, 11 December 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.