Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:14, 7 October 2012

Bangladeshi political families

Bangladeshi political families (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Article is a BLP nightmare, besides a constant target for vandals. Only one of the families listed has an article; the rest is a couple of notable individuals and some (alleged) family members. But the premise of the article is that the families are notable, and that's not proven to be the case for all but one of them. Drmies (talk) 20:22, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

• Keep. I do sympathize with sysop troubles, but being "BLP nightmares" and "targets for vandals" aren't deletion criteria. As to notability, a quick glance tells me the Sheikh Mujib and Ziaur-Rahman families both have a father as president and daughter as prime minister. Calling such families not "proven to be notable" is absurd. If other families are not notable, then their entries should be deleted, not the entire article. There seem to be such lists (at times lists and at times articles) for many other countries, and I think the two examples I found are good enough to conclude Bangladeshi politics isn't immune from family-based influences. The quality of the article is low, with parent-child relationships not highlighted in the structure, and the obviously notable families not having WP articles and hence no wikilinks. But that isn't a deletion criterion either. Churn and change (talk) 23:08, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

• Believe me, I need sympathy in the parenting area, not the sysop area. I know what are and what aren't valid deletion criteria, and that this is a BLP should weigh in. But the salient point is that a list of families that should (properly) have only one member isn't a list. That politics in many countries are influenced by families is clear to everyone, but that does not in itself provide a rationale for this article, of this kind. Drmies (talk) 23:50, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I went and took a hatchet to it per WP:BOLD, leaving only blue links in, and leaving a group in only if it had more than 2 blue links. I can see at least two families in there should really be in there though the family as such doesn't have a WP article, since both of those families have a president and a prime minister father/daughter combination. If the edits get reverted I am not planning to stick around and debate the issue, I will withdraw my vote. If the edits do stick, would you reconsider? Churn and change (talk) 01:31, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

• Delete. If the article is genuinely a net negative to the encyclopædia - if it needs adult supervision by editors who could otherwise be doing good work elsewhere, and if it's an abundant source of BLP violations - then it's surely a candidate for deletion. If the "deletion criteria" really oppose the removal of something which is a net negative to the encyclopædia, the criteria should be fixed. I understand that in principle it's possible to have a decent article on prominent political folk of Bangladesh - possibly at a slightly different title - but that's not what we have now, and it would have to be written (and sourced) from scratch - I have no objection to somebody doing so after the current problematic content has been removed. bobrayner (talk) 23:53, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

• Very well phrased, probably better than I did. Thanks. Churn and change, does this make more sense? Drmies (talk) 23:55, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the BLP part. I think you should probably strike out the "vandalism" part; deleting an article because of vandalism would be an invitation to vandals to try that tactic every time they want an article gone. Also, note that WP:DEL#REASON doesn't include the reason you two mention; I would support modifying the section to include that. Churn and change (talk) 01:55, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Drmies (talk) 04:04, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

• Delete, possibly using TNT. --Nouniquenames 23:56, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
• Delete as a huge WP:BLP problem that cannot be fixed through ordinary clean-up. 01:04, 7 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vcessayist (talk • contribs)
• Delete: article is a BLP violation. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 12:23, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
• Delete: article is a serious BLP violation with highly unreliable entries from those seeking free online opportunities of publicity at the expense of Misplaced Pages's credibility83.81.44.205 (talk) 13:13, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
• Keep Political dynasties are common in SE Asia. The other place where they commonly occur is the USA and we have at least one article about this: List of United States political families. Misplaced Pages would lack global perspective if it only covered the topic in the USA. To cover the topic elsewhere, we just need to consult sources such as Dynasties of India and beyond: Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh. Warden (talk) 15:14, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Biographical)
• AfD debates