Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaimal

Kaimal

All these articles created against WP:NOR policy and may be re-directed (or have a brief mention about it) to Nair or Caste system in Kerala (in list-wise order, if references established). Another two more editors have also raised concern about whether to keep this or not. Thanks. --Avinesh Jose T 13:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because [as mentioned above]:

Avinesh Jose T 05:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/India. --Avinesh Jose T 05:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- There is proper referencing for the article, although more may be required. More content should be added about the Kaimals, rather than just deleting the article.Jammedfly (talk) 05:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Above user has only 22 edits. All above articles qualify as WP:OR and there are no reliable independent sources available. --Avinesh Jose T 08:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I don't know what my contribution to Wikipedia has anything to do with the validity of my statements. The fact is there are numerous credible independant references to the most of the above articles. For example from the Nambiar article:

  1. ^ Bombay (India : Presidency) (1883). Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency. Govt. Central Press, 195. Retrieved on 2007-12-18. 
  2. ^ C. J. Fuller, The Internal Structure of the Nayar Caste, Journal of Anthropological Research (1975), p. 285.
  3. ^ A general collection of ... voyages and travels, digested by J. Pinkerton - Page 736
  4. ^ Kareem, C.K. (1973). Kerala under Haider Ali and Tipu Sultan. Paico publishing house, 136,137. Retrieved on 2007-12-18.

  1. Fawcett. F Nairs of Malabar. Asian Educational Services, NewDelhi. 1990.
  2. Miller, Eric J. 1954. Caste and Territory in Malabar. American Anthropologists 56(3):410-420.
  3. Miller, Eric J. 1955. Village Structure in North Kerala. In M.N. Srinivas ed. India’s Village. Bombay: Media Promoters & Publishers.
  4. Gough, Kathleen 1955a. Female Initiation Rites on the Malabar Coast. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 85(1/2): 45-80.
  5. Makkam: The Story of the "Canonization" of a Nayar Woman A. Aiyappan Folklore, Vol. 45, No. 2 (Jun., 1934), pp. 164-169

Even the Kaimal, a stub article, has a credible reference. Articles such as Panikkar, Nambiar, Karnavar, cannot be merged into a single article such as Nair, because they are too long and also because it relates to other communities such as Ezhava, Ambalavasi, Brahmin as well. The above articles should exist for the same reason that there are articles on Kerala, Haryana, Tamil Nadu, etc. which haven't all been merged with the India article. For the above mentioned stub articles, they should be made larger by valuable contributions. As far as I know it is not Wikipedia policy to cut down stub articles instead of making them better.Jammedfly (talk) 01:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I commented above, all these must be merged with ‘Cast system in Kerala’ article with a small description (no need of creating separate article since lacking its significance or notability). I am not much sure about the references you are furnished. Still all these articles drawing on editor’s personal knowledge and did not cite with valid sources. If that is the case, it should not have nominated. --Avinesh Jose T 04:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(You commented) I don't know what my contribution to Wikipedia has anything to do with the validity of my statements. Please note that I’m not discouraging you to comment. WP is very glad you wish to help develop this encyclopedia. New users are always welcome (WP:WEL) and don’t feel that I’m biting you. However, as a new user you may not have much awareness of our policy i.e in this case, WP:NOR. Please do not mistaken. --Avinesh Jose T 07:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: If the articles are merged with Nair or Caste System of Kerala, the article will become much too long, and information will be deleted by other users, causing important information (which are properly referenced) to be lost. You will also find that there are articles on Nair, Ezhava, Nambudiri. Then why not merge them all into a giant article as well? The groups such as Kaimal, Kurup, Menon, Panikkar, Nambiar deserve their own articles since they are different communities.Jammedfly (talk) 00:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- per Jammedfly.(Shyamsunder) 18:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm not sure we can have a useful deletion discussion on this. If sourced, I think some (but perhaps not all) of these articles have their own independent notability. But the offline sources cited are described so poorly it is hard in some to know what the claimed source is. Often it is just an author and a title - no publisher, year, location, etc. To be fair, a little googling does turn up some of these sources, e.g. [[1]]. Assuming good faith, this does seem to be legitimate encyclopedic content that is simply in need of some careful improvement. Wikidemo (talk) 11:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- Plenty of encylopedic content unrelated to the general Nair article, references for most articles, large numbers of people belonging to the communities mentioned easily making it notable enough. If each Jatt clan in Punjab gets their article, I don't see why Nair sub-castes can't find a spot on an encyclopedia.Nambo (talk) 14:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't an argument. Relata refero (talk) 15:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 16:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - content seems to be encyclopedic. Have we started a rally against offline sources that I'm unaware of? matt91486 (talk) 16:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all all these articles are of importance.

Tinucherian (talk) 08:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all. stubs with potential. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 19:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.

Potential? Funny! This a subcaste (or the title conferred on it) of a subcaste of a caste. The article is created by Single Purpose Account promoting upper caste uppity stuff on Wikipedia. I have shown on several occasions that he provides false references. An entry in an old-fashioned reference (of marginal academic relevance) has an entry on kaimal, which can be seen here. Incidentally this shows that the reference in the article is false. At best a Wiktionary item.59.91.253.37 (talk) 14:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Kaimal is a subcaste of Nair, also used as a title. It may not be a major subcaste like Menon, Panikkar or Nambiar which have differences to each other (usually they do not intermarry readily). Your contributions do not show that you have proved that people have been making false references. Old-fashioned references of academic relevance (even though it may be marginal) are useful and maybe you should list this in the Kaimal article. Also I am not a sockpuppet of anyone and I believe you have absolutely no evidence to prove that I am, only that my account is a new one.Jammedfly (talk) 00:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]