Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deportation of Iraqis

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Deportation of Iraqis}} – (View AfDView log

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Deportation of Iraqis}})

The article makes significant claims, such as the forced displacement of over one million Iraqi Arabs by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) between 2003 and 2005, yet the cited sources do not directly support these assertions with verifiable evidence or numeric data.

For example:

• [https://www.fmreview.org/romano/ The Forced Migration Review article] addresses displacement but does not specifically accuse the KRG or offer detailed statistics.
• [https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/report/41021/iraq-special-report-idps The New Humanitarian report] discusses internal displacement broadly and doesn't attribute mass expulsions to the KRG. (WP:SYNTH)
• [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/apr/20/iraq4 The Guardian article] provides anecdotal reports of tensions in post-Saddam Iraq but does not claim widespread deportation by the KRG, nor cite figures.
• [https://www.voanews.com/a/a-13-a-2003-04-22-26-reports-66314237/543067.html The VOA News report] focuses on Arab return movements and property disputes, but does not support the article's claims of organized deportations.
• [https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL33936.html The CRS report] broadly surveys displacement in Iraq without identifying the KRG as responsible for any mass forced removals.
• [https://www.brookings.edu/articles/iraqs-displaced-where-to-turn/ The Brookings article] examines Iraq's IDP crisis but contains no specific accusations or quantitative data about KRG-led deportations.

Especially who says 1,000,000 million? Additionally, the topic overlaps with more comprehensive and better-sourced articles such as Ba'athist Arabization campaigns in northern Iraq and Arabization of Kirkuk, making this entry largely redundant. What reasoning supports calling it "deportation" when Arab settlers, originally relocated to Kurdish areas by the Ba'ath regime, were simply returned to their places of origin? Finally, the topic fails to meet WP:N and WP:NPOV.  Zemen  (talk) 20:34, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:43, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

:This article documents the displacement of Iraqi Arabs in the post-2003 period, which is supported by sources like Human Rights Watch, the Guardian, and VOA. HRW explicitly uses the term “reversing ethnic cleansing” and discusses Arab expulsions in detail and another 2003 article from The Guardian titled “Arabs flee revenge of the Kurds” describes how, in the aftermath of the U.S.-led invasion, Kurdish groups moved to reverse Saddam Hussein’s Arabization process. And the VOA says “Forced deportations of Arabs from Kurdish-dominated northern Iraq has the United Nations' top human rights official concerned”. this article reflects well-documented patterns during this time. The topic is distinct from Ba’athist Arabization—it focuses on the post-invasion period and its own displacement crisis. I’m open to refining the wording or structure, but the subject itself is notable and sourced, there is absolutely no reason for it to be deleted. DataNomad (talk) 21:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

::You don't need to repeat wording that already exists in the article. My concern isn't that some sources aren't reliable, I never claimed that. The issue is how they're being used. You didn't even explain where the "1,000,000" figure comes from! there's no citation or numeric data supporting that huge claim!. Also, the sources don't accuse the KRG alone, most of them talk about general displacement, with multiple actors involved. Only one of them even says "Kurdish-dominated northern Iraq" and none directly blame the KRG by name for organized, systematic deportations. So why are other participants and contexts missing from the article? That's a clear WP:NPOV.  Zemen  (talk) 21:27, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

:Delete: per nom. Sikorki (talk) 21:26, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

:Support, I don't even need to check sources, I can judge based on the person who made this and their response which doesn't even address the biggest problem, the 1,000,000 claim. It's clear asserting this to only the KRG as this is a Kurd nationalist who wants to flex the deportations rather than help out Wikipedia. Setergh (talk) 21:40, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

::Setergh, please focus on the article and its sourcing, not on your personal opinion of the editor. You should check the sources before offering your opinion at an AFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

:::I agree with this, however it was just a random thing I mentioned. Either way the rest which I have stated is something I find to be valid, as once again, the user has not addressed the main issue. Setergh (talk) 23:30, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

::::I agree to some extent, the user could simple change the “perpetrator” section of the infobox. Other than that, what else seems to be the issue? I’m aware that the KRG wasn’t directly responsible, but does that justify the entire deletion of the page? Etcnoel1 (talk) 16:50, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::Please read WP:N and WP:MOS. This user has a history of creating unencyclopedic content. Just because something appears on Google doesn't mean it deserves a place in any encyclopedia. just look at this (and its nomination for deletion). Some of the numbers in the sources pertain to neighboring countries of Iraq and even Fallujah! Since when have the Kurds established their own country and become Iraq's neighbors? This clearly shows the article was written in a biased manner.  Zemen  (talk) 18:09, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::You are literally targetting me this is the 4th page of mines you are on DataNomad (talk) 16:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Discrimination and Iraq. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:54, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

:Support Per nom. R3YBOl (talk) 21:57, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete Laura240406 (talk) 11:15, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep It looks like to be eligible for keeping; but this is fine if it attaches further references . 110 and 135 (talk) 16:45, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete Support per nom. Kajmer05 (talk) 17:13, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

:

::@Asilvering All substantive concerns regarding the article have already been thoroughly addressed in the previous discussion. What reasons are there to support keeping the article?  Zemen  (talk) 09:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::That's not how this works, @Zemen. What you need is a consensus. Perhaps another admin might count this as "consensus", in which case they could close this at any time, but I'm not going to delete an article that has a complicated reason for deletion, opposition to that deletion, and not a single substantial response in favour of deletion. -- asilvering (talk) 14:44, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete: Appears to be a mish-mash of claims and misreading the sources. I'm sure more people were displaced, but nothing showing this was an organized effort. I can only see coverage from 20 yrs ago and nothing since, I'm not sure this has much notability. The displacements could be mentioned in an article about the war, but we don't have confirmation that this was an organized effort. No scholarly articles have dealt with this either, in the 20 yrs since. Oaktree b (talk) 16:07, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.