Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Puerto Rican Australians


 * 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. Fritzpoll (talk) 12:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Puerto Rican Australians

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

Non-notable ethnic group. There are only 224 such people according to the article, and I can't find any reliable sources proving notability. Tavix | Talk  22:12, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions.  —J.Mundo (talk) 22:53, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't appear to meet WP:RS or WP:V standards. Pastor Theo (talk) 23:11, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  —Grahame (talk) 01:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - unsourced and regrettably, not notable. The article made three claims:
 * 1. that Puerto Ricans were involved in Australia's Federation and the formation of unions and the Labor Party.No evidence is provided for any of these claims and none of the traditional source texts for Federation, Ausralian unions or Australian political parties makes the slightest reference of Puerto Rican involvement.
 * 2. that Puerto Ricans came to Australia to "protect it from the Japanese" then left with their war brides. This is possibly generically true for US soldiers during WWII, a proportion of whom may have been Puerto Rican. But it is not distinctive to Puerto Rico any more than it is distinctive to people from Guam, the Aleutians, Ohio or Rhode Island.
 * 3. that Puerto Ricans had free migration rights to Australia due to the ANZUS Defence Treaty. This is provably false (ANZUS is defence-related, the text is here) so I have removed this from the article.
 * A Puerto Rican population in Australia of 224 might be the only thing in this article that is accurate, but that of itself demonstrates the reason why there are no verifiable sources for Puerto Rican-Australian history or culture. Euryalus (talk) 01:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete No indications of notability and the claims in the article are total bollocks. Nick-D (talk) 08:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Besides being completely unsourced, the topic is misguided. Puerto Rico is not a nation, any more so than Tasmania is, nor is "Puerto Rican" its own ethnic group.  Mandsford (talk) 15:58, 6 April 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.