The result was keep. Wifione Message 17:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC) reply
This is a request for userfication, not deletion. This article was included in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Other Backward Classes, but neither the discussants nor the closing administrator paid attention to it (this has been acknowledged on the closing administrator's talk page). Reason is that the topic of caste is highly contentious; that issues related to nomenclature, politics, the potential for ambiguity due to nuances of spelling and transliteration, and other factors make it necessary to exercise more than the usual level of care to assure verifiability and avoid serious errors in discussing topics related to caste; and that this list is seriously incomplete (in content, sourcing, and context) in its present form. It should be moved out of article space until it is (1) reasonably complete and (2) properly verified through reliable sources. Lists like this one need to provide the kind of context that commenters familiar with South Asia seemed to indicate to be necessary. These issues probably can be cured, but it is misleading for the list to be in article space in its current form. Orlady ( talk) 17:55, 24 December 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Wifione Message 17:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC) reply
This is a request for userfication, not deletion. This article was included in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Other Backward Classes, but neither the discussants nor the closing administrator paid attention to it (this has been acknowledged on the closing administrator's talk page). Reason is that the topic of caste is highly contentious; that issues related to nomenclature, politics, the potential for ambiguity due to nuances of spelling and transliteration, and other factors make it necessary to exercise more than the usual level of care to assure verifiability and avoid serious errors in discussing topics related to caste; and that this list is seriously incomplete (in content, sourcing, and context) in its present form. It should be moved out of article space until it is (1) reasonably complete and (2) properly verified through reliable sources. Lists like this one need to provide the kind of context that commenters familiar with South Asia seemed to indicate to be necessary. These issues probably can be cured, but it is misleading for the list to be in article space in its current form. Orlady ( talk) 17:55, 24 December 2012 (UTC) reply