Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Second-class citizen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. This does not prevent a consensus being reached elsewhere to merge/redirect to another article. Davewild (talk) 09:39, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Second-class citizen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Jrtayloriv (talk) 06:36, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This article is more than a simple dictionary definition and I'm sure it could be expanded. Laurent (talk) 06:47, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you explain why the entire topic of this article couldn't be explained in one-sentence in the article discrimination? That is, "A second class citizen is a person who is the subject of discrimination, in spite of being a citizen." -- Jrtayloriv (talk) 07:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Using the Google search tools above readily shows that this topic has received extensive coverage in news, books and scholarly sources showing that it notable and worthy of encyclopedic coverage far beyond the one sentence definition suggested by Jrtayloriv. Cullen328 (talk) 07:27, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I believe this is an interesting topic and has had wide spread media coverage worthy of inclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnWhitehurst (talk • contribs) 08:03, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. -- Acather96 (talk) 09:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Whatever we decide to do with this, it won't involve the use of the "delete" button. This is a plausible search term. If everything meaningful can be covered in one sentence in the article discrimination, then it should be a redirect to discrimination. If not, it should be kept. Either way, it doesn't belong at AfD.—S Marshall T/C 17:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.