Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White Argentina policy


 * 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 merge (yes, it can be done). I see a clear consensus to either merge or delete the page, but there is no clear consensus as to which of these two outcomes is more desirable. As such, I am defaulting to the option that preserves the most content. -- jonny - m t  10:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

White Argentina policy

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

Original research. There was never a "White Argentina policy", and the term has never been used in any notable academic circles or papers. The article should be deleted and merged with Racism in Argentina. Lobizón (talk) 14:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note — it is not allowed to delete and merge an article as according to WP:AFD:"Try to avoid contradictory or confusing recommendations, such as delete and merge, which can't be done as edit histories of merged text must be preserved (see also GFDL)" Also, if it is a merge you are suggesting, AfD is not the correct venue as mergers should be proposed at WP:PM. However, IMO delete and redirect to Racism in Argentina would be the best option without merging the content, as the article is POV original research/synthesis. EJF (talk) 16:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep this policy was talked about in my Latin American History Class as well as my Meso American Cultural Anthropology class68.27.12.1 (talk) 14:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment to Anonymous editor 68.27.12.1: With the name "White Argentina policy"? Are you sure? I've never heard of non-European immigration being restricted in my country, and I've lived here all my life. Please see the article's talk page to understand my position, and note that none of the sources cited in the article mentions any restriction in immigration or the name "White Argentina policy" at all. It's true that the Argentine government *promoted* European immigration during the XIX century, but it never *restricted* other types of immigration. There's a big difference.--Lobizón (talk) 14:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge with Racism in Argentina per nom. Also, 68.27, your history classes are not an academic circle.  21 6 55  τalk/ʃign 15:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge per nom. While well-written, Google hits for the term "White Argentina policy" = this article.  That's it.    RGTraynor  15:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The whole article is based on a POV foundation about Argentina's race policies. It may not be innacurate, but it's not a good foundation for an article. Also, as said above, this isn't a term that exists outside Wikipedia. I don't like the idea of making it a redirect as it seems to be a slanted title that wouldn't have much search result potential. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 16:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I think the title was derived from White Australia policy, which is a common term. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 16:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep I have created this article with the intention to join several articles in only one. Of course the term white argentina policy is not considered in history, but there was a racist policy like the australian one. The immigration from bordering countries began in the 1950's-1960's when the immigration policy was changed in 1953. I oppose to merge this article into racism in Argentina, because that article talks about discrimination with certain ethnic groups at the present time, whereas white Argentina policy talks about the history of the immigration policy which was encoureged by the argentine government in the 19th and 20th century.--Fercho85 01:38, 01 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment the "Speedy Keep" votes are ridiculous and without foundation. Voting Keep is fine, but this is clearly not a speedy keep. JuJube (talk) 17:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment to Fercho85: I'm afraid you are wrong. No Argentine government has ever restricted immigration on racial or nationality basis. Can you back up your claims with sources? As I said before, none of the sources cited by the article mentions any restriction of immigration or the term "White Argentina policy" at all. In fact, seasonal migration of farm labourers from Chile was very common during the 1930s and 1940s. Paraguayan and Bolivian migration to Argentina was already present in the late XIX century. --Lobizón (talk) 18:07, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * KEEP Seems good to me. Ijanderson977 (talk) 19:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment to Lobizon: Lobizon I never said that the argentine government restricted immigration on racial basis if not that the government itself had a racist ideology about which immigration should be encouraged (european immigration) and about the immigration that should not be encouraged (non-european immigration). Remember that Sarmiento, Roca and Alberdi believed that the country should be europeanize, Alberdi was a proponent of French being the national language of Argentina, because he believed that Hispanic and Christian traditions were enemies of progress and supported discrimination against Spanish, Italian, and Jewish immigration and Roca believed that the solution against the aboriginal threat was the extintion of them according to his campaign conquest of the desert. There is also the invisibilation of the afro-argentines which was again inspired by Alberdi. In the census of 1947 the argentine state claimed that the totality of the argentine population was white. All this gathers that the argentine goverment master plan was to "whiten" the country, therefore there was a racist policy of immigration not exactly like the australian but very similar.--Fercho85 03:39, 02 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment to Fercho85: Good, we both agree that the XIX century Argentine government *promoted* European immigration, but never *restricted* other types of immigration. However, the opening line of the article, unsourced and written by you, openly states "White Argentina policy is an extensive racist ideology that has been built on the notion of European supremacy where non-white immigration to Argentina was intentionally restricted by the Argentine government". The whole article is based on this false premise, and on a made-up name that was never used by any academic, politician, or notable figure. Googling for "White Argentina policy", both in English and in its Spanish equivalent, brings no results. Seeing that your whole article is based on original research, a false premise, and a made-up name, I believe it needs to be deleted. The merge is unnecessary, as most of the exact same text (without the false opening line) is already present in the Racism in Argentina article. --Lobizón (talk) 16:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Anything useful here goes to Racism in Argentina, but this is a non-notable neologism. csloat (talk) 05:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment to Lobizon: Lobizon we can improve and edit the article according to what you say and besise add new sources but I think that by deleting it you are erasing important information regarding the immigration policy in the 19th century because there was a policy in which the government implemented to build a nation (Ideas y Poltica poblacional anteriores a 1930). You claim that the article is a false premise and that is a bunch of isolated opinions from the 19th century, well that bunch of isolated opinions encouraged "certain" immigration that formed the Argentine nation of nowadays. I show the sources specially to you because I know that you are argentine too. Only in order that you know I am not writing articles based on false premises check the racism in argentina version| in spanish andDemographic Argentine ideas (1930-1950)in which this article is supported by the University of Buenos Aires. --Fercho85 02:58, 03 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete: Google search shows 4 ghits outside wikipedia and no detail coverage in third party reliable source. Google books shows only one ghit . Merge any useful content into Racism in Argentina.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 14:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment to  Otolemur crassicaudatus  talk) : Of course if you search white argentina policy you get no matches the term is not considered in history the right term in spanish would be "Ideas Demograficas Argentinas" or Demographic Argentine Ideas in english. I think that the problem of the article is the title, though there was a immigration policy, people have never heard the title white argentina policy because as I said in spanish it is very different. The discution here should have to deal not the deletion of the article if not the right term in english for it. --Fercho85 02:58, 03 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - trivial coverage PhilKnight (talk) 01:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - The topic is amply covered by Racism in Argentina. I did the translation of the Racism in Argentina article, and most of this White Argentina article is a direct cut and paste job of my translation. (What's up with the plagiarism? I know everything here is free domain, but it just strikes me as wrong...) Also, the arguments I see here for applying the label "White Argentina policy" fall into the category of OR since secondary sources do not label it as such.  Vrac (talk) 03:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment to Vrac : Vrac I know that you translated the text but why are you acussing me of plagiarism? The only thing that I have done this to join different parts of articles in only one. Besise this topic is not fully covered as you say in Racism in Argentina that article is about racism at nowadays, there is only one part in which the article deals about the immigration policy and in the article is reffered as "white european racism". As I said we should not delete the article if not to improve it. --Fercho85 02:12, 08 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per lack of notability for term. – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  05:09, 8 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.