Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karkarthar
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. —Korath (Talk) 04:36, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)
Incomprehensible. RickK 21:32, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
- I'd like to think that there's some actual information hidden within this article, but I can't make heads or tails of it. I'm going to
vote deleteabstain for now, but I'll reconsider if a major cleanup can make this article readable. Carbonite | Talk 21:43, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC) - Keep. The subject looks real, and so do some of the editors involved. If it was about a topic I had some knowledge of, I'd definitely prefer such a bad article over having to start from a blank page. It seems to be a better start than most stubs I've seen. My main concern is that the article might be worse than just bad: wrong. And that would be bad indeed. Anyhow, the article only had one day to live, I say let's give it a chance. Rl 22:07, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Cleanup. I need to see some cleanup before I can give a delete or keep vote. Zzyzx11 22:24, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and cleanup. The article is in a sorry state, but this is no reason for deletion. Martg76 23:08, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Delete unless it can be seriously overhauled. Currently the article seems to be gibberish and I can't make anything of it. There aren't many Google hits for the term Karkarthar (56 hits) and most seem to be on Indian matrimonial or "find-a-bride" services. I get the impression this may be something real, but if no one is capable of turning into something remotely comprehensible there's no reason to have it sitting around confusing people. Arkyan 00:50, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)- Changing vote to keep based on the rewrite. Arkyan 16:26, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Horribly written - David Gerard 01:45, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, makes a reasonable amount of sense to me. If I was interested in Karkarthars I'd much rather have this than nothing. Kappa 01:54, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Perfectly notable Indian ethnic group. VfD is not cleanup: please do not try to use it as such. GeorgeStepanek\talk 03:11, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- This could have been speedy deleted under the criterion of "No meaningful content or history", but I brought it here first hoping somebody can make heads or tails out of it. The article as it stands makes no sense. RickK 05:14, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- No meaningful content? That's quite a strict criterion. "Mother tongue is Tamil with unique Mayavaram accent and dialect." ... "Karkarthar mostly live in Southern part of India, Tamilnadu in districts of " <list of districts> ... sure sounds like meaningful content to me. Surely you're not proposing to delete articles on the basis of the their editor's fluency with English? GeorgeStepanek\talk 06:12, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Indeed I am, if the article is unreadable. We delete articles written in other languages besides English, why not delete articles written in English which no one can read? RickK 06:16, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- It seems that other people can get at least some meaningful information from this article. Why can't you? Or rather, why don't you bother trying? It's obvious that the editors are trying hard to write a meaningful article, but are having great difficulties doing so. We need to give more help to them, not cast scorn on their efforts. This is where systemic bias comes from. These people have the knowledge we need to broaden our coverage. Why make it even harder for them to do so? GeorgeStepanek\talk 06:35, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Because crap like this reflects badly on the encyclopedia. I can just see the articles and the blogs pointing to this stuff and laughing gleefully about just how awful Wikipedia is. RickK 06:38, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- I don't want to see that happen either. But that's what Cleanup is for. VfD is not Cleanup. GeorgeStepanek\talk 06:51, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Because crap like this reflects badly on the encyclopedia. I can just see the articles and the blogs pointing to this stuff and laughing gleefully about just how awful Wikipedia is. RickK 06:38, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- It seems that other people can get at least some meaningful information from this article. Why can't you? Or rather, why don't you bother trying? It's obvious that the editors are trying hard to write a meaningful article, but are having great difficulties doing so. We need to give more help to them, not cast scorn on their efforts. This is where systemic bias comes from. These people have the knowledge we need to broaden our coverage. Why make it even harder for them to do so? GeorgeStepanek\talk 06:35, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Indeed I am, if the article is unreadable. We delete articles written in other languages besides English, why not delete articles written in English which no one can read? RickK 06:16, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- No meaningful content? That's quite a strict criterion. "Mother tongue is Tamil with unique Mayavaram accent and dialect." ... "Karkarthar mostly live in Southern part of India, Tamilnadu in districts of " <list of districts> ... sure sounds like meaningful content to me. Surely you're not proposing to delete articles on the basis of the their editor's fluency with English? GeorgeStepanek\talk 06:12, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- This could have been speedy deleted under the criterion of "No meaningful content or history", but I brought it here first hoping somebody can make heads or tails out of it. The article as it stands makes no sense. RickK 05:14, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, article as it stands is un-encyclopaedic. Megan1967 03:55, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Abstain since this is such a mess. If the facts are correct and it was made into something a bit more comprehensible, I'd certainly support a "keep." For now, I simply don't know what I'm voting on. - Lucky 6.9 07:41, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and cleanup. The topic is certainly encyclopedic, and the content looks salvageable. All we need is one person who knows something about Tamil Nadu, and the chances of that are good. - Mustafaa 07:54, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- If memory serves me correctly the articles creator emailed me and asked me to help clean it up. I don't know anything about the subject myself so can't help that much content-wise, but I'll try to give them some help with basic Wikipedia editing so they can clean it up themselves. Keep. Mgm|(talk) 09:03, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete current content and list on requested articles. Radiant! 09:11, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- That's going backwards. This is probably the best English-language resource available. Kappa 10:28, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Modified article. I hope that those who didn't know what they were voting upon will find the article legible now. Please note the requests for a neutrality check and a fact check. Most of the references that I could find appear to be hopelessly biased. According to sources the Karkarthar are either the best people ever with claims to notability coming out of their ears, or simply one subdivision out of many who are a bunch of snobs thinking themselves superior to everyone else just as the other subdivisions all do. Note that the easiest reference to find, which was supplied by the original author, is an association that promotes the group. Uncle G 14:24, 2005 Mar 14 (UTC)
- I second that. Magnificent save. Strong keep. - Lucky 6.9 03:26, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Clear keep as rewritten. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:29, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.