Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of divided nations


 * 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 per consensus Keeper   |   76   |  Disclaimer  22:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

List of divided nations

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

This list makes no sense. The first bit is not a list of divided nations: it's a list of divided ethnic groups. Division of ethnic groups is perfectly natural: are we saying all ethnic groups should be confined to the same region? Second section is a POV minefield, nationalist edit-warrior's paradise, and makes little sense either: "divided nations" are not nations any more, are they? The term is an oxymoron. So what's India doing here? Modern India is not a "divided nation": at least, almost nobody thinks of it in that way. Third section seems irrelevant, and the fourth bit is is true but of limited utility. Moreschi (talk) 21:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - no way to define the term in a non-OR way, no way to avoid it becoming POV and no way avoiding the article becoming a never-ending edit-war battleground. -- L a v e o l  T 21:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, has been a playground for POV-pushers from various sides to promote their pet irredentist causes, and lacks any coherent definition of what a "divided" nation is in the first place. Note that "List of X" articles typically work only as subarticles to articles about "X" itself, but of course we do not have (and I believe never had) any article about "divided nation". Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with the above; this is definitely going to be hard to keep NPOV, especially with no clear qualifications for what should be on the list or not. With enough imagination, just about any country could be put on here. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete OR & POV magnet. No way to tell which countries should be on the list or not, and as for ethnic group - every ethnic group of more than a few tens of thousands of people can be found in more than one country. And the point is??? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I quite like the content but the article has no sources at all and that won't do for this sort of tendentious material. Colonel Warden (talk) 23:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete POV mindfield is a mild word for it. Canyouhearmenow 23:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete blatant OR. Bogdan що? 01:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - No way to verify, strong POV, and possible OR. Tiptoety  talk 02:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It's not such a bad idea. But this is the "horse designed by a committee", going all different directions with divided ethnic groups who don't have their own nation, nations that have been broken up, nations that used to be part of a larger group, etc.  When you think about all the changes in national boundaries in the history of civilization, every nation that ever was could fit in this list.  On a project like this, it's helpful to have some ground rules to prevent an editing war between people who think they know more than anyone elseMandsford (talk) 02:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Divided- sorry for the pun, but got mixed feelings on it. The part of the ethnic groups should be on it's own & not included here. Only that in the later part is fine (even in the historical aspect), but as the original author stated "was initially for nations that were divided, like Korea". So delete most, but not all as a bit is correctly used. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 11:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per Carlossuarrez46 et al. Too bad, as it is such a nice and pretty list. Bearian (talk) 20:27, 4 March 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.