Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seafarers (ethnic groups)


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 05:53, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Seafarers (ethnic groups)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NEO, WP:PRECISION. Unsourced and unsourceable. Scope is too vague to be covered in an encyclopedia. "Seafarer" has a dictionary definition of a sailor or a traveler by sea. The term is not used in academic sources or in common parlance to refer to sea-living cultures collectively, whether Austronesians or not. Which brings into question on what this article is about. The existing content of the article is already covered at the individual pages of the groups linked here, the dab page at Sea gypsies/Sea nomads (which in contrast, are actually commonly used terms), and the article on the Austronesian peoples. This article dates back to 2005 and seems to have started out as a WP:DICDEF for Seafarers (currently a redirect to Sailor) that slowly morphed into a haphazard WP:CONCEPTDAB, then got split off. O BSIDIAN †  S OUL  16:22, 18 January 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. As the nom has noted, "seafarers" is not a designation for any ethnic group. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:20, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:55, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:17, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:17, 26 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete seafaring is an occupation not a ethnicity. Quetzal1964 19:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: Doesn't Sea Gypsies deserve to be a broad-concept article, though? If this article isn't too horribly written, it could be renamed as such to replace the current dab page. --Paul_012 (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename to Sea gypsies (with lowercase g) to supplant the current dab page, per above comment. The seafarers term fails WP:NEO, but sea gypsies doesn't, and is what describes the actual scope of the current article. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:36, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The terms "Sea gypsies" and "Sea nomads" aren't abstract or difficult to define, thus WP:BROAD isn't necessary. It's a catchall term that is used quite specifically in almost all sources to refer to one of the groups listed in the dab page. Furthermore, you simply can not describe multiple unrelated cultures in a single page when all they have in common is that they live (or lived) in boats. The content of the current Seafarers (ethnic groups) article is quite horribly all over the place because of this. Going into detail for some, mentioning others only briefly. The scope seesaws between highly specific to very very generalized. Because again, the only connecting characteristic in the article is that "they all live in boats." That's it. All of the groups listed in the dab page have their respective articles that treat their subjects more thoroughly without conflating anything or implying a cultural relationship where it doesn't exist. If an article should ever be created, it should be on the topic of Sea nomadism (cf. Nomadic pastoralism), as in an article on the way of life in anthropological terms, and not simply a (spottily) expanded list of every single culture that has ever lived or traveled by boat (which is the case here). -- O BSIDIAN  †  S OUL  18:36, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I've taken another look, and while I still think the subject warrants an article (probably best based on an anthropological point of view, as you said), I'm convinced that the current article isn't a good start in that direction, so struck my !vote. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:08, 1 February 2017 (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.