Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Asians/North Africans


 * 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   redirect to Richard Lynn. — Jake   Wartenberg  00:58, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

South Asians/North Africans
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A "racial group" coined by a rather controversial psychologist that doesn't seem to have caught on outside of his work. Google news shows no hits, and google scholar has 4. (A regular google search returns more, but many are in comments sections of blogs, and hardly count as reliable sources. Aside from the fact that this would appear to be a non-notable neologism, the article doesn't serve much purpose other than pushing the POV of the person who coined the term. B figura  (talk) 00:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as nominator, for the reasons above. B figura  (talk) 00:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as per clear/concise argument by nom. Peace and Passion &#9774;  ''("I'm listening....") 00:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per the nom's excellent rationale. Joe Chill (talk) 01:25, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions.  -- Joe Chill (talk) 01:26, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge with Richard Lynn; it is a distinctive feature of his system (I doubt anyone else agrees with him), and anyone searching for the term will want his article. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:02, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. Mathsci (talk) 07:36, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. --Ramdrake (talk) 13:07, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep When you google "South Asians and North Africans" in quotes you get thousands of hits.  I created the article because the term needed explaining & the fact that it has come up in 4 scholarly articles makes it more notable than a lot of the articles on wikipedia.  And the term has caught on outside of Lynn's work; it's used quite frequently by J. Phillipe Rushton.  Needpics (talk) 14:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC) — Needpics (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Yes, I would imagine that googling for South Asians and North Africans" would return a bazillion hits. That's because most of them aren't related to this usage of the term. And Rushton's use of the term hardly validates it as being widely adopted. (He's in the same sort of controversial (and minority) camp as the proponent of the term). -- B figura (talk) 14:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * All influential people are controversial. Anyone who is not controversial is failing to challenge ideas. And it's very difficult to know how many of those google hits are relevant or not so speculating does not advance the argument. Needpics (talk) 14:58, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * But not all controversial people are notable, nor are all of their ideas necessarily notable. Especially not those that are minority opinions that shouldn't be given undue weight. If you find mainstream citations that show widespread use of the term with this particular meaning, great, otherwise there's not much else to say. -- B figura (talk) 15:53, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well I agree it's an extreme minority perspective & thus should not be given much if any weight in mainstream articles as per undue weight policy, but because it has been referenced in peer reviewed academic journals, it seems notable enough to have an aticle. Minority views are fine when they are contained within articles about those minority views. For example flat earth theory is too fringe to be given weight in an article about the earth, but that doesn't mean an article about the flat earth theory should not exist. Needpics (talk) 16:03, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think my nomination gives the reason this should be deleted. In short, this != flat earth theory. -- B figura (talk) 16:29, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We have an article on Flat earth theory; heck, we even have an article on John Cleves Symmes, Jr., whose earth was even weirder. 18:43, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Richard Lynn - classic example of a fringe theory, which can be satisfactorily covered in the article on the person who created it, but has no notability of its own. Robofish (talk) 15:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and WP:NEO. It is a fringe theory and not supported by the scientific data. Wapondaponda (talk) 08:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The article uses a reference to the journal Intelligence as a source. Intelligence is a peer reviewed academic journal so this is obviously not a fringe theory. Needpics (talk) 15:13, 14 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I should also add that the reason I created this article is that so many articles on wikipedia make reference to Richard Lynn's racial divisions that there was a need for a wikilink to explain what he meant by South Asian/North African. The term needs explaining because his definition of South Asian is broader than the typical definition of South Asian & the lumping together of South Asians with North Africans is confusing to those who see these as separate groups.  It's inefficient to have to explain what Lynn means by South Asian/North African in every article, hence the need for an article that can just be linked to for those who are confused. Needpics (talk) 18:23, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * At the moment, there is only one article that links to South Asians/North Africans: Race and intelligence, where the term is menioned once in a listing of racial groups by intelligence. It'd be simple to expand tha mention to include a short parenthetical definition.   Will Beback    talk    19:19, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well there are several articles which mention the concept, I just haven't bothered to wikilink them to the South Asians/North Africans article because I don't know if it will survive. There are many articles that mention Richard Lynn's theory on race & these tend to make reference to the South Asian/North African group. Needpics (talk) 21:50, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge & redirect to Richard Lynn. Walter Siegmund (talk) 23:07, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge & redirect to Richard Lynn. This is a marginal topic that is only relevant to Lynn. The redirect can take the place of the article when the term is referenced in other articles.   Will Beback    talk    23:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: For the reasons cited by nom and because it is extreme fringe POV-pushing.Skywriter (talk) 19:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I've noticed that a lot (all?) of the people who are voting for this article to be deleted have been embroiled in articles that are hostile to Richard Lynn's views, thus these people are not a representative cross-section of wikipedia opinion.  Needpics (talk) 22:18, 15 October 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.