Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afghan people

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. Rossami (talk) 02:38, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Afghan people[edit]

Original research Denni ☯ 16:22, 2005 May 22 (UTC)

Delete. I agree, it's a personal conclusion. The title of the article also doesn't match its content. Could be speedy-deleted.--Kaonashi 17:21, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I take back what I said. The article has been completely changed. It has no trace of the version we were debating about just a while ago. It looks pretty decent now, and deserves staying in Wikipedia. So, because of that, I vote keep. I'll also ask all of you to reconsider your decisions.--Kaonashi 02:47, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. — RJH 18:33, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever happened to the old send to cleanup option? It would be a valid topic, indeed, I remember putting it on the Open Tasks. --Dmcdevit 20:34, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- And now keep as it has been redone into a genuine stub. --Dmcdevit 03:54, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pashtun, possibly merge some content into Afghanistan. — A.M. 23:06, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep the improved article. — A.M. 01:03, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, POV original research. Megan1967 05:58, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the Article just needs to be redone. Falphin 23:48, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This article should probably be moved to Afghan (people) Falphin 21:33, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually, I was going to ask why English (people) isn't at English people, like Danish people, Norwegian people, Dutch people, Swedish people, etc. --Dmcdevit 21:38, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    - Good point, well I suppose it should be the other way around. Falphin 21:49, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Kaonashi. JamesBurns 10:38, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- You might want to read the article first, as all the other votes came before the rewrite. --Dmcdevit 17:47, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand from stub, model like English (people). It deserves an article. Oops forgot to sign T.A Stevenson 16:12, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article doesn't resemble what the vfd was for. How do the votes count? Falphin 02:01, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and continue to expand. Sjakkalle 08:09, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above comment. --The Anachronism 13:12, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - vfd no longer relevant. Internodeuser 20:36, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep now a good article - congratulations to the editors who added meaningful content--AYArktos 00:42, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as LONG as there is a mention that not all people in Afghanistan consider themselves Afghans.Yuber^(talk) 01:05, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll put a notice of that on the talk page as something to not delete or alter . Falphin 01:36, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep revised article. Nice work, Falphin! Denni ☯ 01:28, 2005 May 26 (UTC)
Keep: This is a useful article Gblaz 19:06, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Strong Keep. Just needs clean-up.--Jpbrenna 06:04, 5 Jun 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.