Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Brahmins


 * 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 - consensus is that it violates WP:NOT and while there are arguments to keep, the majority centre around the existence of other similar lists rather than making the case for the continued existence of this one. - Yomangani talk 10:00, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

List of Brahmins
A list with a extremely broad criterion for inclusion and no context. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection and this is just a list of names, with a few POV issues in the entries. A Category structure would make much more sense for members of this (and other) castes. Nilfanion (talk) 21:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and the list is contextless and POV. --Core des at (talk) 21:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but limit to people whose notability is strongly related to their being a Brahmin.--T. Anthony 11:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. - Ganeshk  ( talk ) 02:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Unwilling Keep - only to get rid of the atrocious caste-based cats.Bakaman Bakatalk 03:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete I understand's T Anthony's point but it will be difficult to extablish a boundary. It is one thing being a Brahmin and another to "act as one," ie) become a spiritual Hindu. If it stay, it will be prone to vandalism from anti-caste people. GizzaChat  &#169; 06:13, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Extreme delete per nom. utcursch | talk 07:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Why the below articles are not being considered for deletetion ??
 * List_of_Kayasthas
 * Famous_Yadavs
 * Distinguished_Khatris
 * There is lot of stuff like this on wikipedia. If you want to delete it, better get rid of all the information related to all castes, rather than deleting some specific articles which would hurt the feelings of some communities.
 * Comment There are no articles on Famous Yadavs or Distinguished Khatris. List of Kayasthas does not contain POV, and has context. Everyone on its list actually has an article on Wikipedia. However, the list is unverifiable, so it may have to be tagged for cleanup later. --Core des at (talk) 19:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * See Yadava and Khatri. Uncle G 08:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep If POV and context are the only issues, then it seems we could clean it up rather than delete, though I appreciate Gizza's point about drawing a line.  Tewfik Talk 00:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 *  AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Avi 03:01, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Are we going to have an endless number of notable Brahmins? It's hard to draw a line on what a "Notable Brahmin" is, so it's better to delete. Sr13 03:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd think it be the same kind of standard for say List of famous families or List of deaf people. It should be limited to people who are notable for being Brahmin or who contributed to the history of Brahmins in some way.--T. Anthony 03:43, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete poorly defined. --Peta 03:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete per |Famous Telugu Brahmins AfD Kevin 03:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I do agree with the majority of the delete sentiment above. However, I would like to point out that we have List of Muslims (and the numerous related List of Muslim [insert profession here]s). We have List of Jews, List of Christians etc., etc. This List of Brahmins lists seems rather tame in comparison. --  tariq abjotu  04:06, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions.   -- Mereda 07:10, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete And following Tariqabjotu's comment above, those lists ought to go as well.  Emeraude 13:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I had very little idea what they were supposed to be, so a definition in the introduction would be helpful. I have added a one sentence definition from the Brahmin article, so readers who are not followers of the Hindu religion will have a clue. (When I saw the name of the article, I thought of rodeos.) If a number of them are notable enough to have articles on their own merits, there is utility in having a list, a category, or other means for linking the articles. The Brahmin article says they are at least 2% of the popuation of India, which would be 20,000,000. If the most important present 1% of them were listed, it would amount to a list of 200,000 individuals, leaving off those who lived in the past. What criteria can be used to include or exclude individuals? Edison 15:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as indiscriminate collection of information, per WP:NOT. Sandstein 17:58, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete There is not an adequate criteria for inclusion to prevent it being an indiscriminate collection of information, violating WP:NOT. GRBerry 01:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment If we delete this article then articles such as List of Christians should also be deleted.
 * 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.