Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turks in Latin America

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 delete. Keep Turks in Chile. Cirt (talk) 19:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Turks in Latin America

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

More minority groups which have not been written about non-trivially by any scholars or journalists. Part of a series of boilerplate stubs all created by the same editor based on a population statistics table. There's no actual articles that can be written here.

The idea that there is any significant Turkish community anywhere in Latin America (like the unsourced claims of 30,000 in Venezuela and 50,000 in Brazil) is based on misunderstanding --- "Turcos" is an old local misnomer for Christian Arab immigrants from Syria (then part of the Ottoman Empire) who arrived in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Neither their descendants nor any modern scholarly sources identify them as Turks, except in quotation-marks. (See, for example, Arab Chileans and Palestinian community in Chile, or [1][2], which discuss the issues more thoroughly). cab (talk) 02:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. cab (talk) 02:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. cab (talk) 02:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Uruguay-related deletion discussions. cab (talk) 02:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. cab (talk) 02:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. cab (talk) 02:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete since the only source provided suggests that these groups are very small, hence the lack of coverage elsewhere. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:09, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Turks in Chile and delete the other articles. I think it would be best to rename the Turks in Latin America article to Turks in the Americas and include North America were they have a stronger presence. This would therefore be an article similar to that of Turks in Europe. Deutsch-Türkçe-English (talk) 12:42, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn't be trying to merge a bunch of little disconnected non-notable national topics together to write regional-level articles. It's appropriate to write regional-level migration articles when scholars or journalists have actually analysed the issue at that level, as in Caucasus Germans or Koreans in the Arab world. But are there any scholars or journalists who have discussed "Turks in the Americas" as a whole? Seems to me the answer is no. Turkish Canadians and Turkish Americans are notable populations, but no reliable sources analyse them together, let alone in concert with alleged Turkish migrants in the rest of the Americas. So any attempt by Wikipedians to write such an article inevitably falls into original research. cab (talk) 03:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well Kemal Karpat is known for his work on Turks in the Americas (not just those in the North). The majority of the Ottoman migration to the Americas were not ethnic Turks but nonetheless they still had a presence which should not be ignored. I think it would be best to just change it to Turks in the Americas in order to avoid all these silly articles being created.Deutsch-Türkçe-English (talk) 23:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok i wouldnt mind user Deutsch-Turkce-English's suggestion. But Keep Turks in Chile. Not all Arabs were called Turks because the majority were actually christians not muslims. And if anything, Arab Chileans and Palestinian community in Chile should be merged together.Turco85 (Talk) 12:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually yes, the term "Turcos" was also used erroneously for referring to Arab Christians. And the sources in the Turks in Chile article don't even discuss Turks. Every single time that islamonline article says "Turks", they put it in quotation marks, indicating they don't even know whether these people were actually of Turkish ethnicity. Joshua Project is not a reliable source either; they are just a Christian evangelical group who take data from primary sources like national censuses, and grossly misinterpret it. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Archive 7#Blanking of links. cab (talk) 03:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, Joshua Project is a whole load of nonsense. But we cannot say that they were not Turks either. One of the references in the article (a video in fact) does show that there is a Turkish community in Chile. So lets keep this article and delete the others. The Turks in Latin America can be moved to Turks in the Americas. What do we all think? Deutsch-Türkçe-English (talk) 23:45, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 21:37, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - batch of articles without solid sources or evidence of notability of topic. --Orange Mike | Talk 04:52, 19 December 2009 (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.