Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Canadians of Asian ancestry


 * 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   no consensus. Rjd0060 (talk) 23:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Canadians of Asian ancestry

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

Indiscriminate list about a non-notable subject of interest, of which i've never seen any Major studies or academics related to. Jimmi Hugh (talk) 21:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   — Cliff smith  talk  21:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.   — Cliff smith  talk  21:52, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Trivial intersection. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I gotta disagree with my friend 10-lb. on this one. To me, this no different than List of Asian Americans, and I don't think it's at all trivial.  Mandsford (talk) 22:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Firstly, there is no precendent set by other articles, for all it's worth that article could also be just as viable for deletion. Secondly, in that case, the topic of "Asian Americans" is of notable academic interest and features an article in it's own right. However, we really should think about it's inclusion in Wikipedia also, but that is an entirely serarate issue. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 23:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I guess I just don't get it, and maybe if the topic of "Asian-Canadians" isn't of academic interest, that's a Canadian thing. From what I can tell, there are more "East Asian/Southeast Asian" (7%) and "South Asian" (4%) residents of Canada then there are "black" Canadians (if I read the census data correctly), and it seems that it would be a pretty substantial minority.  I'm surprised if sociologists in Canada don't concern themselves about the wide variety of ethnic groups within their nation's borders, but maybe it's just British Canadian, French Canadien and "other". Mandsford (talk) 00:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Given the proportion of Asians in Canada, this list runs the very real risk of becoming indiscriminate. I don't think it's quite there yet, though, so I'm neutral on the AfD. But I think we do need to consider such things -- while the topic of Asian-Canadians may well be notable in itself, a list of all notable Asian-Canadians could get really unwieldy. RayAYang (talk) 05:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per items 1-4, 7, 9, and 10 of WP:LC. Stifle (talk) 18:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not that this isn't valid content; it's that we already have more specific lists at Chinese Canadians, Japanese Canadians, Korean Canadians, Vietnamese Canadians, and on and so forth, so this list essentially duplicates other content unnecessarily. Delete, but give it a once-over first to make sure that everybody is also listed on their more appropriate nation-specific list. Bearcat (talk) 22:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I say we should keep this article. The article just needs more written information to enhance the readability of lengthy data. There is a list of British Asian people in Wikipedia. Jimmi Hugh is being irrational. Sonic99 (talk) 03:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Hey, while you're welcome to your opinion, I'd rather you didn't call me irrational, at least when you haven't provided a single good reason to keep. I'm quite touchy about my sanity and logic. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 20:18, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:CIVIL. Differences of opinion are not proof that anybody's necessarily being "irrational". Bearcat (talk) 18:58, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bearcat and Stifle. Vegaswikian (talk) 16:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Why the hell do you want to delete this article when you don't bother to delete the list of British Asian people? Yes, the asian community is large in Canada and this article provides this fact. Fact should not deleted. We can edit the article and make it better. You can delete the list of asian names in the article and rename the article as Asian Canadian. Sonic99 (talk) 02:44, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Firstly, I didn't once mention not wanting to delete the British Asian article in this AfD, you must have somehow misread it when I didn't even mention that article once. Secondly, having looked at that article since you mentioned it, I would infact choose to keep it, firstly because it's not an indiscriminate list, and secondly because despite my own dislike of these classifications, the topic of "British Asian" ancestory is academically notable and studied (Therefore providing content to make an encyclopedia article about), Asian Canadian Academia is slim to none and this is not a dictionary, it is a place to bring together established topics of interest. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 17:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I said before that we can edit the article and make it better. If we change the article and make it academically notable, it won't be indiscriminated. Canada is a multicultural and racial tolerant country. Asians and europeans live and work together in Canada. Why would a British man living in England, want to meddle a Canadian article? Sonic99 (talk) 02:22, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hehe, I got a good giggle out of that. However, incase you're not aware, Wikipedia is not a place for intellectual debate or Original Research. All information must be already documented and verifiable. Also, I'm "meddling" in an English Language article, I couldn't care less about what country the article is about, try not to take the topic so personally. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 11:57, 21 September 2008 (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.