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 Chinese American. Redirects are cheap. No harm in making one. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 00:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cantonese American

[edit]

Though not exactly recently coined, fails WP:NEO. Sources which use the term (1,470 GHits, 42 GBooks hits) do not define it or explain how it is different from Chinese American. Don't see why this page is needed in addition to Chinese American. cab 05:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. MER-C 05:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Turgidson 06:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Chinese American. hateless 06:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Chinese American per User:Hateless. There are 70-100 million Cantonese worldwide, so it's plausible that someone might search for the term "Cantonese American". Black Falcon 07:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - There isn't enough distinction between Cantonese and other sub-sub-groups to warrant its own article - plus, popular culture never makes this distinction. z ε n  08:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - This is a neologism. But a redirect wouldn't hurt. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:08, 3 February 2007 (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.