Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Race, ethnicity, and religion in various censuses

:{{la|Race, ethnicity, and religion in various censuses}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Race,_ethnicity,_and_religion_in_various_censuses Stats])

:({{Find sources|Race, ethnicity, and religion in various censuses}})

Short article that is almost entirely either unsourced or original research, and which I cannot foresee being salvaged to make a suitable article any time soon. The topic of the census enumeration of race, ethnicity and religion is notable, as indicated by its treatment in articles like Race and ethnicity in the United States Census and Race and ethnicity in Brazil -- neither of which is linked or discussed from this article. The comparison and discussion of such enumeration in various world jurisdictions is also likely to be notable (and controversial), but the handful of isolated factoids about 6 countries provided in this article does not come anywhere near what a comparison article ought to include. Only three facts in the article have reference citations; I flagged the U.S. fact as "fails verification", but in fact I also cannot find the Israeli fact in the cited source; I haven't tried to translate the Russian document. In summary, although there might be a notable topic here, I don't find it in this article. It would be easier to start over than to try to salvage this one.. Orlady (talk) 04:09, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

::If you want to start it over, then fine. Futurist110 (talk) 05:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

:::Sorry, but I am not volunteering to start the article over. That isn't the purpose of this AfD. However, I want to share the information that I stumbled upon a source that contradicts the article's assertion about religion in the U.S. Census: http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/report-religious-landscape-study-appendix3.pdf . It seems that there was long history of the Census collecting information on clergy and places of worship, including their denominational affiliations. A law passed by Congress in 1976 bars the Census from asking "any mandatory question concerning a person’s 'religious beliefs or ... membership in a religious body'”, but it does not bar other types of data collection related to religion. --Orlady (talk) 13:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

::::Allright, I fixed that and also fixed some other flaws in my article. I have also linked the U.S. Census race and ethnicity page and the Brazil race page in this article. Futurist110 (talk) 19:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - The concept, of race, ethnicity and religion being documented in a census is part of Enumeration process. As OrLady has mentioned, race and ethnicity in the USA, Brazil or elsewhere can be very notable. But this article is too general and overlaps the basic concept of enumeration and has far to little to offer in specific articles like those mentioned by OrLady.
  

It would be best to let this one go and hope that the concept can be built upon in the enumeration article or as a list to that article. Or combing the concept with Demographics. Or something similar as an article request.

I could see an article on Demographics & enumeration studies covering this subject and much more. For a taste, see:

[http://www.census.gov/srd/papers/pdf/rr92-04.pdf Using Information from Demographic Analysis in Post-Enumeration Survey Estimation] to adjust for under counts. Jrcrin001 (talk) 06:52, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:36, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 10:47, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete - Unencyclopedic topic. Highly unlikely search phrase. POV fork in the making... Carrite (talk) 15:57, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

• Keep - It is a very useful and encyclopedic topic. I added a whole bunch of sources to this article right now and expanded it a little bit. This article has a lot of potential and if someone wants to change the article name, then that's fine with me. I do not think that I have any bias in this article right now. Futurist110 (talk) 19:36, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

::I have now improved and expanded this article like crazy and made this article MUCH better. Futurist110 (talk) 04:39, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

• Keep - I'm reading the nominator's comments, and largely agree with them at the time they were posted. However, Futurist110 has indeed significantly expanded this, and a lot of Orlandy's concerns have been addressed. There are many countries now, and there'll probably be even more over the course of its history, and the references have been taken care of. I do have one recommendation though, and that is including analyses of this as a general topic or the country-specific data, which would help further establish notability. That in itself shouldn't be too tough. --Activism1234 03:22, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
• Keep. Right now this is a sourced and useful list (please see requirements for lists here. No reasons for deletion. My very best wishes (talk) 21:15, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
• Keep - This falls under WP:LISTPURP: The list is a valuable information source. "This is particularly the case for a structured list. Examples would include lists ... grouped by theme." The state of the current list is that editors do not appear to be guessing what may be added to the list, so the list's inclusion criteria appears to be appropriate. I suggest the page include a sortable table format having columns for country and each of race, ethnicity, religion, or some combination, and when the feature was first added to the census. That way, you could see which countries count their populations by race, bor example, and when the first started doing so (which would help the reader see where this started and how it spread about the world). -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 10:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

: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.