Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indian Mexican


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Indian Mexican

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

Note: this is an article about immigrants from the South Asian country of India, not about the indigenous people of Mexico. Probable WP:HOAX, definitely fails WP:N. The article was created by, who was indefinitely blocked last year for adding huge amounts of false content to human migration articles. I can't confirm any of the content. The only significant connections between Indian emigrants and Mexico are:
 * 1) The well-documented phenomenon of Punjabi men in early 20th century California marrying Mexican women &mdash;but there's no evidence that any significant number of them or their descendants actually went to Mexico.
 * 2) Manabendra Nath Roy in the Communist Party of Mexico&mdash;but one person decades ago does not make the entire community notable
 * 3) Newspaper article about Sikhs in Mexico &mdash;most would appear to be non-Indian converts

Obviously a naive search for "Indians in Mexico" or "Indian Mexicans" will just give you a bunch of false positives about indigeneous peoples. I tried some other web searches in both English and Spanish (which you can see in the box below), but didn't find anything useful. The only source at all about them is a report from the Non Resident Indians & Persons of Indian Origin Division of India's Ministry of External Affairs which covers Indians in every country in the world; it does mention Indians in Mexico on page 239 for about three paragraphs. This isn't a sufficient basis on which to write an article. Other sources you'd expect to find information in, like Lal's The Encyclopedia of the Indian Diaspora, don't make any significant mention of Mexico at all.

Cheers, cab (talk) 07:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions.  cab (talk) 07:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions.  cab (talk) 07:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  cab (talk) 07:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - Notable and sourced. And please format this AFD properly! Badagnani (talk) 07:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sourced at all, and what formatting are you complaining about? cab (talk) 07:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Hmm, i've got some drifting thoughts about it now. In accordance with Cab, I was the first to point out the issues regarding original research about this article, and I appreciate his response. However, there are three sources which Cab has managed to find now. Since there were also three or four internet sources mentioning about Pakistanis in Tanzania, the page Pakistani Tanzanian was deleted anyway as I guess "three or four sources" is simply not enough. I can tell that this article faces the same kind of evolving scenario because the PDF file that we have is mostly talking about history of the Punjabis and that was way before in the 40's and 50's, not much about the current society. The page about Sikhs in Mexico on the other hand, mentions some 100 Indian families in Mexico ( I think), but again, the issue of lack of sources pop up. This article should be deleted and merged with Indian diaspora or Demographics of Mexico at the best. Teckgeek (talk) 08:15, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment. What I argued on the other AfD&mdash;and what I argue here as well, is that the sources fail the "significant coverage" clause of Notability. The article about Sikhs spends most of its time talking about the Mexican converts, and also about one individual Indian guy, but basically doesn't tell us any details about the Indians in Mexico as a group other than that "they exist" and "they're Sikhs". The Indian government report is a little better, but it's still rather short&mdash;and the middle paragraph focuses on investments by Indian companies, rather than actual Indian migrants. cab (talk) 08:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no claim of notability. 207.233.67.8 (talk) 19:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete As per nom. Even if we assume that the article is factuall and the number (400) is correct and referenced, it is still too small a commumnity to be notable. Not to mention that they do not carry any influence in Mexico the way the Indian community in US or UK does. Besides there are migrants from India into practically every country on this planet (We had a station in Antarctica too!!!). That would mean approx 200 X-Indian community articles. And the biggest reason would be that it is probably a neologism. --Deepak D'Souza 13:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 03:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete there is no claim of significance or importance and the stated population of 400 (out of 110,000,000 Mexicans) seems almost irrelevant. I would be surprised if the true number were that low, however. Drawn Some (talk) 03:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete--the text itself gives me no reason to think this is a notable topic, and the lack of references confirms this. The nominator's pretty exhaustive work seems more than enough to support deletion. Drmies (talk) 05:15, 1 May 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.