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. Whilst number counting produces a majority of 5-3 to Delete, I have to consider the weight of argument here. Keep !votes seem mainly based on claiming notability but as more than one Delete !vote points out, for that to be a valid argument the subject would need to have significant coverage of the Italian community itself in third-party sources as opposed to passing mentions that there are Italians in Pakistan, which at the moment it clearly hasn't. Black Kite (t) (c) 11:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Italians in Pakistan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Random combination of groups. Just number over 300 is hardly enough to warrant an article. CynofGavuf 09:32, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a non-issue. There are 57 Turks in India. Lyk4 (talk) 11:44, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. 150 Turks, in a country with a population of 1 billion. Lyk4 (talk) 11:45, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Besides, the problems of the "Turks in India" article (and many other "Turks in Xyzland" articles) have already been mentioned at this discussion; no one offered any solution or tried to improve the articles. I for one wouldn't object to deleting it. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turks in India. cab (talk) 02:29, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Turks in India is just as non-notable, but isn't nominated... yet. In the case of "Italians in Pakistan", the article does nothing more than to recite a single statistic (that there are 300 Italian persons in a nation of 169,000,000). I suppose that we could write individual articles to answer questions like "How many Italians in Pakistan?" "How many Pakistanis in Italy?" "How many _____ians in the Republic of _____ia?" etc., but it would make more sense to write one intelligent article about the breakdown of a nation's census figures by national origin, rather than 200 nothingburgers like this. Mandsford (talk) 21:43, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:58, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:58, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Small numbers or "random combination of groups" (whatever that means) aren't a reason for deletion per-se. However, it seems from various Google searches that this group of people have not been covered non-trivially by newspaper articles, scholarly papers, or government reports. Many other "Fooians in Pakistan" articles appear to have been created along the same lines without regard for WP:N (e.g. Koreans in Pakistan, Japanese in Pakistan). cab (talk) 01:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per CaliforniaAliBaba (cab). A small yet notable group may be kept, but this is very small and non-notable, as shown by the stub itself and searches online. Bearian (talk) 20:13, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Being a small group does not make it non-notable. There is at least one source provided in this article on the topic, and probably more can be found. The first source really goes into this. Dew Kane (talk) 04:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I agree that the small size isn't relevant. All of these articles are encyclopedic in value. Also, did anyone search for news in either of the two languages of the countries involved? Dream Focus 04:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I'e added about 3-4 extra sources that mention the Italian community in Pakistan. Looking at the current level of information, and given the relatively small size of Italians in Pakistan, this article forms a perfect stub and the AFD should be withdrawn. Mar4d (talk) 17:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: foreign relations and bilateral investment are not relevant to articles about human migration. Most of these "references" you added consist of routine one-paragraph news coverage about events (e.g. "Italy's national day celebrated in India"). cab (talk) 00:43, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as arbitrary intersection of nationalities and setting a very bad precedent. There are 36,672 possible articles of the form [Nationality] in [Country] (that is ¹⁹²P₂; there being 192 members of the United Nations and order is relevant) and I suspect few are notable subjects. Bangladeshis in the Dominican Republic, anyone? Stifle (talk) 08:40, 19 April 2010 (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.