Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spanish Gibraltarians

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. It's patently unclear, after all this procedural bureaucracy, that "Spanish Gibraltarian" is a neutral term. AfD does have a responsibility to eliminate POV forks when they come down the pike, and I see no reason not to confirm the findings of the previous debate. However, the most important problem is that there is no assertion of notability nor proof that this particular sub-group has played an important role of the history of Gibraltar since the British occupation. Mackensen (talk) 15:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Procedural update: 70 revisions restored: per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 December. `'mikkanarxi 21:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish Gibraltarians

Spanish Gibraltarians (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Article was rewritten and renamed towards the end of the prior AfD and restored after a WP:DRV decision. Relisting is procedural, so I abstain. ~ trialsanderrors 06:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

• Keep/merge. Seems to be a valid fork of Gibraltar. Based on the ramblings of the previous AfD, there seems to be a larger POV dispute going on here. AfD doesn't seem like the proper place for the handling of this article. --- RockMFR 06:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep/merge/rename. I understand the title is offensive to some Gibraltarians, but I think a better name could be chosen. - Francis Tyers · 09:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment another option would be to make the page a disambiguation page. It already covers three particular meanings of the term. Some of the extraneous information could be stripped out and it could be left in the form of a dab page. - Francis Tyers · 12:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Delete The article is a rehash of a previous on that was sucecessfully subject Afd and the history of the Spanish occupation of Gibraltar is fully covered in the article history of Gibraltar 99% of Gibraltarians do not want any connection with Spain.[1]

More detail and a Comment on Gibnews' points by the author of this article (moved to talk page --Gibnews 20:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete — if we take away the elements that are already covered in History of Gibraltar, San Roque, Spain#History, Culture of Gibraltar and Demographics of Gibraltar, we're left with a small organization that doesn't assert notability. Yes, Culture of Gibraltar has severe pro-Gibraltarian POV problems; but this problem won't be solved by creating a POV fork. Demiurge 11:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. This article gives three definitions. The first, which comprises the first three paragraphs, is the part that is a recreation of the "original inhabitants" article for which a consensus to delete was established, and appears to have been created primarily to promote a probably-not-notable organisation of Spanish families who claim descent from the people who left Gibraltar rather than submit to British rule. This appears all to be covered already in the San Roque article.
  The second and third, which I believe are new, again appear either to duplicate material in other articles, or to consist of original and unreliable research (in Britain it is not common to use the term "Spanish Gibraltarian" at all, and one citation from 1890 -- claimed here as the first, though without any evidence either way -- hardly counters that fact).
  Basically, appears to be a POV fork combining existing information that's already covered better in other articles, and with a very rare term used for the title (<100 Google hits for "spanish gibraltarian", many of which are for things like "the Spanish/Gibraltarian border"). Propose that the author would better spend his efforts working with other Wikipedians to improve the existing articles. — Haeleth Talk 12:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete - inherently POV title - no such thing as Spanish Gibraltarians - you're either one or the other, as Gibraltar is not in Spain. Duplicates information better presented elsewhere (as per Demiurge), with some POV stuff added. Proto::type 14:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Haeleth. What happened to the people that left Gibraltar after the British conquest is of encyclopedic relevance, but probably not here and in that form. Sandstein 15:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per RockMFR. As for "you're either one or the other, as Gibraltar is not in Spain" i must remind people that we have African American, Arab Israeli, etc... -- Szvest Ω ^{Wiki Me Up ®} 16:03, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep It's a valid term. Lurker ^oi! 16:12, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep': Its only just been undeleted. It is NPOV, has valid references and is no less valid than an article on Irish Americans, Asian British or Moroccan Spaniards.... The history of Spaniards in Gibraltar, is of interest in wikipedia, as is the history of Maltese, Sephardic or Genoese Gibraltarians. These communities are also worthy of an article.--Burgas00 17:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This article gives its references clearly and apparently only offers as its mandate the various meanings and usages of this ethnic identification term. The article almost certainly has NPOV issues (made clear by this discussion if nothing else) but secondary source references and limited mandate seem to show it is neither OR nor a hoax...so any problems are an issue for article editors to work out, not AfD. Regarding arguments above that "edit wars are inevitable" I'd only say we shouldn't delete decently researched articles because problems MAY happen in the future. -Markeer 17:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete' per reasons already given. GiollaUidir 20:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - we don't need more POV forks. It's extremely unlikely you can make this NPOV since most of the article, if you take away what's covered elsewhere, is bits and pieces. Too much seems very .. close .. to OR. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 21:09, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete- original research Astrotrain 21:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Where is the OR? I see multiple references, and a google search shows the term is used in media sources. Lurker ^oi! 15:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Keep It's a definate segment of the Gibraltar population. --Oakshade 22:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC) After giving a another close read of this, I'm going to go with Weak Keep. There is a POV bent to it and I never like that. I always say that means the content should be changed, not the article deleted. I understand this is a passionate issue in Gibraltar (having been there, I've discussed it with locals), but this was a historic part of Gibraltar, even under British rule and that can't be ignored. This reminds me of the article Whites in Zimbabwe. That segment has heavily dissipated over the years and even if it totally disappears, the subject still would be relevant even for historical reasons. --Oakshade 23:17, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

• Weak Delete, it's obvious that this is intended as a POV fork, but there may be some grounds for a brief description somewhere of Gibraltans of Spanish origin. Lankiveil 00:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC).

• Rename and keep, I propose Descendants of Spanish Gibraltarians, or Rename and merge. Randroide 12:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• Comment So far it seems the vote is split roughly 50/50. Anyone has any constructive criticisms of the article (i.e. changing stuff which may be POV)? I certainly can find nothing. I erased all the stuff about the behaviour of the British during the occupation precisely to keep it neutral and non-partisan.... I guess the main question to ask is the following: Would an article on Maltese Gibraltarians be opposed by those who want to delete this article? If not. Why? --Burgas00 02:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Why? UEFA --Gibnews

What does UEFA have to do with the Maltese Gibraltarians?

Nothing, its the Spanish Government, acting illegally again trying to deny the existance of the Gibraltarians who are not Spanish --Gibnews

• Delete This isn't a vote, as I pointed out to User:Burgas00 (who is the original author of this article) in the comments made in the original nomination Originary Inhabitants of Gibraltar. User:Burgas00 renamed/moved this article after several delete recommendations had been made to Spanish Gibraltarians and this avoided the deletion as onlt the re-direct was deleted at closure of the AfD process. Now that this article has been nominated, I suppose we can expect to see this kind of tactic again. So, all that said, what are my reasons for deletion? I recommended deletion previously, as the original article was misleading, heavily POV and in places wrong. This article has become what we can now see, which is still POV (and making a POV fork), the facts are disputed, and the topic is about a very minor and not notable segment of Gibraltrian inhabitants who decided not to leave Gibraltar after British conquest who (more than 250 years later) still consider themselves Spanish and the "Heirs of Gibraltar". If there is anything of note in this article it belongs in the main Gibraltar articles, NOT on it's own page. Delete this and whatever else User:Burgas00 decides to rename the article as next. Robovski 23:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Robovski, by your comment it is clear to me that you have neither read the article nor the sources before giving your opinion. I would also like to point out that this article has been undeleted and is now relisted procedurally. It is not here because of any "tactic" of mine. Please assume good faith. --Burgas00 23:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Delete The Spanish occupation of Gibraltar is already covered elsewhere. Gibraltarian is a present-day term describing the people born in and of Gibraltar. They are British, not Spanish, by birthright and NOT Spanish. Proof? Gibraltar is British territory, not Spanish territory .This article promotes the +wishful+ Spanish POV which denies Gibraltarians exist as a distinct people and should be removed. (Unregd. user)

• Comment I've had enough of people using AfD in order to promote a particular viewpoint. I think this should be a procedural keep, AfD is for deciding whether or not articles belong on Wikipedia, not a space to rant about articles you disagree with. Lurker ^oi! 15:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

• Comment racist rubbish does not belong. --Gibnews
• Delete, whilst Merging verifiable sentences into main Gibraltar articles. WMMartin 17:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

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.