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. Except for Eastern Europeans in the United Kingdom, for which there is no consensus. Sandstein 20:01, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern European Americans[edit]

Eastern European Americans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Including also within the nomimation:

• Eastern European Australians
• Eastern European Canadians
• Eastern Europeans in the United Kingdom

All of these articles make the unsubtantiated claim that "Eastern Europeans" have been recognised as a pan-ethnic group. The articles consist of synth where various mentions of the term "Eastern European" are randomly collected together without much coherence, and fail to substantiate the core premise of the article. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southern European Americans and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northwestern European Canadians on articles by the same user and same format also closed as delete. Hemiauchenia (talk) 13:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 13:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 13:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 13:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 13:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 13:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 13:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as WP:SYNTH per the outcome of several recent AfDs on related topics.Mccapra (talk) 15:19, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As below, Clarityfiend is correct, so the UK article should be kept. Mccapra (talk) 21:28, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the first three, but keep Eastern Europeans in the United Kingdom. That unofficial grouping gets media and scholarly notice, e.g. Britian had influx of eastern Europeans (The Irish Times), Eastern European migrants stop coming to Britain (The Economist), The future of Eastern Europeans in Post-Brexit United Kingdom (EconStor), The effect of Eastern European immigration to the UK on wages, employment and the Brexit vote Clarityfiend (talk) 23:35, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This article can provide valuable information to people interested in this specific topic. I believe its inclusion improves the encyclopedia and support keeping it up per WP:BRAR - "If the rules don't correspond to your idea of improving Wikipedia, break them." --Greysonsarch (talk) 17:59, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Greysonsarch: I have nominated 4 articles for deletion, can you clarify your vote? Also you have not expressed a policy based reason for keeping the articles. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:04, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I advocate for keeping the article up. My vote is to keep it. My reason (I'm correcting the Wikipedia rule citation that I wrote above, apologies for its inaccuracy) is that I believe that the rules cited above prevent us from improving and maintaining Wikipedia, as I believe that this article's existence DOES improve the encyclopedia. "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it." (WP:IGNORE) My vote and opinion is not a personal attack, it's just a vote and an opinion. --Greysonsarch (talk) 18:09, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all Eastern Europeans are quite well recognised as a category – we even had an arbcom case for it. For the primary case of Eastern European Americans, the Library of Congress recognises the category and we have books such as this. The nomination's claim that such Eastern Europeans don't exist is therefore absurd. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:00, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for the reasons set out in the nomination. This seems to be a ragbag of people from places that were once part of the USSR. What do Belarusians, Ukrainians, Russians and Moldovans have in common that they don't share with Rumanians, Bulgarians and Serbs (not mentioned in the introduction to the Eastern European Americans article)? If membership of the USSR is the criterion, why not Estonians, Latvian and Lithuanians? Athel cb (talk) 08:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the first three, weak keep Eastern Europeans in the United Kingdom per the !votes above. Unspecific arguments in the "this is good to keep around" vein are not all that helpful, and a link to a children's book is not sufficient grounds to keep the page Eastern European Americans. Nor is the existence of a LoC category (the people who gather all the books about everything) a reason to keep the article we actually have. WP:SYNTH leads to WP:TNT, even if the label has been used in print somewhere before. XOR'easter (talk) 16:02, 16 April 2021 (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.