Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interracial

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. Spartaz Humbug! 19:02, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interracial (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)

Not a proper dab entry in the lot on this page. Can't think of anyplace to redirect this to. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:22, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:32, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to miscegenation. That article lists "interracial" as a synonymous term that is preferred by scholars. That's good enough for me, and I think that people should end up somewhere when they search for "interracial". It's not a uncommon word, and I think miscegenation links to all the appropriate topics. If there's something prominent that it doesn't link to, then we can use a hatnote or "see also" link. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:31, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This solution seems potentially extremely offensive, deletion with no redirect would be preferable. Artw (talk) 16:01, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein  08:28, 11 April 2015 (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.