Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was:  Userfy. The page has already been moved to User:Austhistory99/Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence; I will delete the redirects created by the move process. RL0919 (talk) 20:19, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence

 * – (View MfD)

This is basically a full scale attack on identifiable group. It doesn't belong anywhere on Wikipedia, and is irredeemable. So, it should not exist, even in Draft space. Rob (talk) 01:22, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Mostly original research and synth claims, selective use of/misrepresents source material. The article reads like a racist attack. Strongly support the statement that this article "doesn't belong anywhere on Wikipedia, and is irredeemable". Bacondrum (talk) 02:17, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Recommend userfication as notes, discontinue the notion that this is an article draft. Disagree that it is a “full scale attack”. It is, however, WP:NOR and consequently suffers WP:NPOV issues. I recommend that the author instead work to improve related coverage in existing articles, and use existing article talk pages to discuss new spinout pages before creating them. Coverage of pre-European culture, including war or violence is lacking, but sources are very very difficult, and a newcomer writing a new page is a very difficult path. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Userfy as per User:SmokeyJoe. The idea that this is an attack on Native Australians seems weird.  War is an ancient tragic activity by H. sapiens, not only by specific populations.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:31, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - The aim of this draft is to develop an Australian specific WP entry on mankind's pre-history & pre-colonial violence, similar to War Before Civilization. Some imminent Australian historians such as Geoffrey Blainey have commented on the dearth of published information on wars and violence in pre-colonial Australia. We have uncovered vast amounts of historical and archaeological information recently on this very topic during our research on Bruce Pascoe and Dark Emu. We note that the editors proposing the deletion of this draft also appear to be very opposed to our successful edits of Bruce Pascoe and Dark Emu. Please be assured that we will add to and improve our draft before posting it. To delete this draft now would be highly premature. Editors will be free to comment and edit the WP entry once it is published. We believe the information we have uncovered from peer-reviewed academic sources is important and should be in the public domain Austhistory99 (talk) 21:25, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Austhistory99 “The dearth of published information ...”. I believe that this is right. However, Wikipedia is not an original publisher.  You are on WP:NOR dangerous ground.  Read WP:DUD. I recommend that you userfy your notes, don’t draft until you have a good plan for a notable (topic commented on in publications by multiple authors) topic.  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:56, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * *Userfy Yes, sorry bad terminology on my part - I didn't mean a "The dearth of published information..." to imply I would generate OR but rather there is a "dearth of collation of the published information on this topic". As you can see from my draft all the citations are published reliable sources. It was my intention to follow WP:STICKTOSOURCE Research that consists of collecting and organizing material from existing sources within the provisions of this and other content policies is fundamental to writing an encyclopedia. The best practice is to research the most reliable sources on the topic and summarize what they say in your own words, with each statement in the article attributable to a source that makes that statement explicitly. Source material should be carefully summarized or rephrased without changing its meaning or implication. Take care not to go beyond what is expressed in the sources, or to use them in ways inconsistent with the intention of the source, such as using material out of context. In short, stick to the sources.If no reliable independent sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it. If you discover something new, Wikipedia is not the place to announce such a discovery. I will look at how to move this draft to a userfy status until it is ready.Austhistory99 (talk) 00:24, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
 * "dearth of collation of the published information on this topic" -> That's still a problem. You shouldn't be cherry picking sources and quotes, and weaving them together, to push a particular POV.  Of course, there was violence in pre-colonial Australia, like everywhere.  That can be discussed in the relevant articles, like History of Indigenous Australians which can be further broken up as needed, on a neutral basis, such as by time period, geographical area, population group, etc...  If you have something like History of pre-colonial Indigenous Australians, it's possible to balance sources that are negatively focused on violence, with other sources that are not.  But, when the entire article is based on a particular negative portrayal, you'll find all the sources support a particular narrow point of view.  --Rob (talk) 04:15, 28 December 2019 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.