228:- this article is supported by numerous reliable independent sources. There is a pre-existing merge proposal which should be separately dealt with. If the merge is not considered appropriate, only then should the article be judged on its own merits. As it stands, this subject is sufficiently cited to establish notability - npov problems are
252:
As
Knowledge (XXG) does not view article forking as an acceptable solution to disagreements between contributors, such forks may be nominated for deletion...The most blatant POV forks are those which insert consensus-dodging content under a title that should clearly be made a redirect to an existing
322:
My assessment is as follows. The sources in the RS article are reliable and independent, and contain noon-trivial coverage of the subject. This rules out the "delete as POV fork" option. Between the other two options, the correct place for discussion is a merge proposal on the talkpage.
259:
is that existing article, and it is impossible to contrast "Race science" with "Scientific racism." The sources used in the article are precisely two of the most famous sources used in "Scientific racism".
75:
208:
376:. Some information seems good are not in the another page, delete the page we may lose the information. Why don't we merge the pages and make a redirect for one of the page over delete it?
129:
70:
17:
102:
97:
380:
362:
329:
264:
238:
220:
194:
180:
158:
106:
54:
169:: I think the best issue is to merge it into "Scientific racism," as "Race Science" (and "Academic Racism") are all synonyms (
89:
354:, which besides lacking a proper reference & being more than disputable in its current form, belongs to the article
395:
36:
394:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
303:. That is, RS contains some valuable information (not worthy of deletion) but the subjects largely overlap.
246:. A merge was proposed and seems to have been rejected. NPOV in itself is not sufficient for deletion, but
377:
93:
347:
173:
49:
204:
191:
343:
339:
300:
290:
256:
217:
145:
141:
52:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
351:
359:
261:
177:
155:
324:
233:
150:
170:
335:
296:
282:
85:
60:
123:
275:
I'm sorry, but that rationale is untenable. I see only three possibilities:
286:
247:
137:
306:
The subjects are distinct, and RS is worthy of an article on its own.
202:. What I could understand of it was duplicative of the SR article.
388:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
355:
350:. The only info in RS which is not in SR is the paragraph on
342:
does not already cover & includes. SR already dealt with
358:. Thus, yes, deletion is the appropriate course to follow.
119:
115:
111:
313:
Do you accept that these are the options available?
76:
Articles for deletion/Race science (2nd nomination)
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
289:. RS contains no material worthy of inclusion in
398:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
154:, are already cited in Scientific racism.
68:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
67:
71:Articles for deletion/Race science
24:
216:redundant to Scientific racism.
144:. The two references invoked,
1:
381:16:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
363:11:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
330:15:42, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
265:15:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
239:14:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
181:12:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
55:20:51, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
415:
221:20:14, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
209:18:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
195:18:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
159:17:28, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
232:sufficient for deletion.
391:Please do not modify it.
299:ought to be merged with
32:Please do not modify it.
285:should be deleted as a
66:AfDs for this article:
334:There is nothing in
348:J. Philippe Rushton
136:This is an obvious
344:Stephen Jay Gould
340:Scientific racism
301:Scientific racism
291:Scientific racism
257:Scientific racism
146:Stephen Jay Gould
142:Scientific racism
406:
393:
352:Richard Lewontin
327:
236:
207:
127:
109:
34:
414:
413:
409:
408:
407:
405:
404:
403:
402:
396:deletion review
389:
325:
234:
203:
174:first paragraph
100:
84:
81:
64:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
412:
410:
401:
400:
384:
383:
370:
369:
368:
367:
366:
365:
317:
316:
315:
314:
308:
307:
304:
294:
279:
278:
277:
276:
270:
269:
268:
267:
223:
211:
197:
185:
184:
183:
151:The Bell Curve
134:
133:
80:
79:
78:
73:
65:
63:
58:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
411:
399:
397:
392:
386:
385:
382:
379:
378:Srtsopid08167
375:
372:
371:
364:
361:
357:
353:
349:
345:
341:
337:
333:
332:
331:
328:
321:
320:
319:
318:
312:
311:
310:
309:
305:
302:
298:
295:
292:
288:
284:
281:
280:
274:
273:
272:
271:
266:
263:
258:
254:
249:
245:
242:
241:
240:
237:
231:
227:
224:
222:
219:
215:
212:
210:
206:
201:
198:
196:
193:
192:wikipediatrix
189:
186:
182:
179:
175:
171:
168:
165:
164:
163:
162:
161:
160:
157:
153:
152:
147:
143:
139:
131:
125:
121:
117:
113:
108:
104:
99:
95:
91:
87:
83:
82:
77:
74:
72:
69:
62:
59:
57:
56:
53:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
390:
387:
373:
336:Race science
297:Race science
283:Race science
251:
243:
229:
225:
218:Bigdaddy1981
213:
205:Cap'n Walker
199:
187:
166:
149:
135:
86:Race science
61:Race science
45:
43:
31:
28:
360:Tazmaniacs
262:Tazmaniacs
178:Tazmaniacs
156:Tazmaniacs
346:and with
326:Skomorokh
235:Skomorokh
190:per nom.
287:POV fork
248:POV fork
176:, etc.)
138:POV fork
130:View log
253:article
244:Comment
103:protect
98:history
50:Jaranda
338:which
214:Delete
200:Delete
188:Delete
107:delete
46:delete
250:is: "
140:from
124:views
116:watch
112:links
16:<
374:Keep
356:race
226:Keep
167:Note
148:and
120:logs
94:talk
90:edit
255:".
230:not
128:– (
172:,
122:|
118:|
114:|
110:|
105:|
101:|
96:|
92:|
48:.
293:.
132:)
126:)
88:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.