Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dalit Lives Matter

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. Sandstein 15:43, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dalit Lives Matter

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG. None of the sources talk about the foundation of the organization or mention enough details. Some have used this term purely as indicator for advancement of human rights than any organized slogan. The article is purely propaganda piece attempting to gain popularity on the expense of Black lives matter (a clearly notable subject) but Wikipedia is not a WP:SOAPBOX or should be used for WP:PROMOTION WalkingDisks (talk) 15:08, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.WalkingDisks (talk) 15:20, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WalkingDisks (talk) 15:20, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:SOAP and WP:PROMO. शिव साहिल/Shiv Sahil (talk) 14:01, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
7 independent references. The article is not promotional. It's too short. Rathfelder (talk) 16:21, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion pieces, blogs mainly discussing a different subject, self-published sources (Lulu, youth ki awaaz) are not "independent sources". WalkingDisks (talk) 07:48, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: dalit lives matter is not a movement. It gets used as a phrase, or slogan. There are other movements regarding dalits, but this is not a movement. —usernamekiran(talk) 23:26, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It is not a notable phrase either or else we would be also having Chinese Lives Matter, Indian Lives Matter, Asian Lives Matter since each of them can be backed with a couple of reliable sources though lacking overall GNG just like this subject. WalkingDisks (talk) 07:49, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

erm... So the brown lives dont matter? Not fair! —usernamekiran(talk) 08:37, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article claims the subject to be an "international activist movement", but sources confirm it is not a movement, let alone becoming an "international activist movement". Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 16:07, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How do you define a movement?Rathfelder (talk) 10:30, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Movement means a coordinated group that is acting on a very specific political issue or ideology. No such 'group' exists here contrary to the false claims of existence made on the article. WalkingDisks (talk) 11:58, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, but with no prejudice to recreation should real life resources and media sources become available. Aman kumar goel is right that it is not an international movement, but wrong that it shows no signs of becoming one. As for the nominator's arguments, let this be deleted for the right reasons. I cannot imagine why Wikipedia would have an interest in concerning itself with the promotion of an agenda by the subject of an article, in the world outside of that article. There is no promotion within the article, nor in its choice of words. Is the nominator attempting to invoke WP:NOTINHERITED? There is no sign of the article seeking to align itself with BLM in any way. The purported movement itself, with its name, yes, but not the article. The problem is that it is not a movement. At this point it is little more than a Facebook meme, as the link in TheList article shows. The Communist Party article confirms this when it says, "there should be" such a movement. It should be a movement, it should have received more coverage, but only one of those things concern Wikipedia and neither of those things are true at this time. Anarchangel (talk) 03:13, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Anarchangel: Hi. I dont think WalkingDisks is trying to invoke WP:NOTINHERITED. But I think they might be talking about Wikipedia:Other stuff exists or WP:OTHERSTUFF, or maybe both of them. —usernamekiran(talk) 08:37, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

delete "dalit lives matter" is not a movement per the Communist Party article, where it says "there should be" such a movement. If the phrase/slogan "dalit lives matter" had significant coverage, and was notable; then the prose and refs of the article could have been changed accordingly. But the phrase fails general notability guideline too. And unfortunately, as it is not a movement and article stating as such; is factual inaccuracy and can be considered as a hoax even though the article was created out of genuine misunderstanding, and without any bad intentions. Under these circumstances, deletion is the correct call. —usernamekiran(talk) 08:37, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non notable organization and clearly fails WP:GNG as per nom. Abishe (talk) 06:06, 9 January 2020 (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.