Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Kongu Vellalars


 * 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. Keilana | Parlez ici 02:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

List of Kongu Vellalars

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

Nominating on behalf of User:Sudharsansn, he claims the articles are hopelessly NPOV and false, as well as propaganda. You can get more from his comments on my talk page, or maybe he'll chime in himself. In any event, this is procedural, I have no opinion (or real knowledge of this stuff). The following related pages are also nominated for the same reason:

UsaSatsui (talk) 05:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete: Seconded, the article is truly hopeless and its very basis lies on identifying individuals whose 'caste identity' cannot be verified or more strictly something that should not be verifiable, and more importantly is something that 'they' themselves consider irrelevant. This article is hopelessly biased and has no factual or verifiable information. Sudharsansn (talk · contribs) 05:26, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and edit, with an outside opinion if necessary. This really sounds like an editing problem. Find sources for the individuals. DGG (talk) 02:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all - These all look like magnet articles for all sorts of political slander and unverifiable claims. We get the same problem on List of Freemasons, and that article has to be watched and rved regularly.  Moreover, if the designation is irrelevant (especially without self-identification), it's a lot of work for what is essentially trivia (and thus unencyclopedic). MSJapan (talk) 04:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and edit, like DGG says. This is a bit of a mess right now but it sounds like it can be sorted out. See also: Articles for deletion/Gounder (caste). Dreamyshade (talk) 07:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sarcasticidealist (talk) 09:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. I really despair of these South Asian caste/clan/tribe/surname (or whatever other name to give them) articles. I'd really like to get to understand them but the lack of NPOV editing and the surfeit of POV editing that goes on just makes the whole subject incomprehensible to those of us who have been brought up in different social systems. After getting that rant out of the way I'd suggest that picking off one or two articles for deletion doesn't help anything. What is needed in this case is a merging of a whole set of seemingly related articles into a smaller number of NPOV articles, which is an editing issue rather than one for AfD (is there a project which would take this on?). These are the ones I can identify in this case, but the same principle applies to many others of these caste/clan/tribe/surname/whatevers:
 * Gounder (caste)
 * Kongu Vellalar
 * Vellala Gounder
 * Gounder (title)
 * List of Kongu Vellalars
 * List of Kongu Vellala kootams
 * List of castes using Gounder title


 * Strong Delete: All these articles you have listed have been created, edited and maintained by a list of three IPs and a Puppetmaster who has had 18 sockpuppets. Now one can imagine the kind of purpose these articles help 'promote'. All this is being written by one individual managing a 'caste/race' based organization seeking to use Wikipedia for propaganda. It would be wrong to allow all these list of related articles to be listed considering the content, zero verifiability and spurious history. All these articles have totally random superiority claims and citations like 'matrimonial websites'!! It would be great if the whole bunch is just wiped clean. Thanks Sudharsansn (talk · contribs) 05:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * To the above unsigned user, above my comment who had asked about these articles, these articles canNOT be NPOV because the very purpose of listing the caste names, subgroups, 'prominent' people and populating that list with random names is POV. The very existence of these sub-sub-sub group articles, tall claims, relating ancestry to some godforsaken place is all intentionally POV and any article written further on such a foundation is just as fallacious as all other 'caste' articles. It is sincerely advised that these articles should go.


 * To put it simply, it is pure, unencyclopedic, POV, agenda-driven junk. Sudharsansn (talk · contribs) 05:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Sigh... Over the last year, I have tried to learn a bit about the various castes in southeast Asia.  I quickly found that to be a difficult task, as there a such a huge number of sub-articles and lists and stubs and so on that it is impossible for anyone from the outside to learn anything (or to be certain what they read is correct or even meaningful).  This needs to be pruned, and limited to a few notables as in the parent article.  King Pickle (talk) 02:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: Personally, I dont think there is anything wrong with lists of people, but this list is sourced with non-neutral Gounder-community websites. - Ravichandar 05:38, 1 April 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.