Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regions of Asia

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 redirect to Outline of Asia. Tone 11:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regions of Asia

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

This article is pointless and full of POV, the page is completely uncited and definitions of regions are nonsensical in certain cases. There is a vast template as well as other pages that already perform the function this page should fill Thegreyanomaly (talk) 08:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't find it biased, but I say delete as being redundant. > RUL3R^>trolling_>vandalism 10:04, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This article has been around since 2006 and has established itself. I see no indication of "bias"; rather, it's a portal to other articles about Asia. I don't think citations are required since this is a gateway to other articles about Asia. If there are other articles which perform the same function, but better, please list what they are. In December 2009, 816 readers looked at it. Removing it may inconvenience future readers.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 17:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Random IP editors consistently put in their POV. For example, until I fixed it, the article was using the Greater Middle East as a region, when the GME is a political region defined by the second Bush Administration as opposed to an actual reason. From I experience, I have often noticed that IP editors come to pages like this to remove places like Pakistan and Afghanistan from South Asia just to support their bias. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 18:39, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If this page was fixed it would be this page United Nations geoscheme for Asia. As it stands now it is random and incomplete. J8079s (talk) 19:45, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete since "region" is not defined, this list has extremely imprecise inclusion criteria. the un geoscheme is a potential type of grouping, but this isnt that. region could be anything from a small watershed or ethnic enclave up to transnational subdivisions per the un geoscheme. countries are not regions. i dont see any value in this list, and i seriously doubt its deletion is going to inconvenience readers.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. "Regions of Asia" is a very likely search term. It is talking of physical regions smaller than nations as well, unlike the UN geoscheme, which is more political. Hence, not redundant. Refinement is required, but deletion is not called for. --Geeteshgadkari (talk) 13:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Geography of Asia. The article is virtually useless for use as a reference. I think some of it uses what's called "alphabetical order" but mostly it's a list of blue links organized randomly. Mandsford (talk) 18:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect (Merge) with Geography of Asia. Izzedine 07:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Outline of Asia. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Outline of Asia is the best redirect. J8079s (talk) 20:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it time for an admin to close this. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 19:57, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do you think it should be closed? You opinion now is likely to be decisive. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm the guy who posted the AfD, so my position is Delete, but I am fine with the page being turned into a redirect to Outline of Asia. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 21:26, 16 January 2010 (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.