Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Basimba people

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. Kurykh (talk) 03:24, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Basimba people

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

The material in the article is unsourced. The references linked to do not support the assertions and claims. There is complete lack of peer-reviewed scholarship on the material. Cartney23 (talk) 06:45, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, joe decker ^talk 06:09, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 04:08, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:45, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:45, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep From the previews, some of the sources do support claims in the article. There appears to be ample material on the Basimba/Bashimba. That much of the article is unsourced and poorly-written is no basis for deletion - it needs it be cleaned up instead. Greenman (talk) 09:16, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - definitely needs a good deal of work, but as far as I can tell, this is verifiably a population of people, discussed in academic work. I.e., the group is probably inherently notable in terms of WP's core functions - in much the same way geographic features are presumed to be notable. I may be wrong. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I agree, google books results give good evidence for GNG. I also agree that it needs some work. I want to point out there is a related page with similar issues, Basimba clan names. Smmurphy^(Talk) 22:32, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - as per above.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:32, 22 February 2017 (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.