Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daggafari
This article focuses on the evolution of the contemporary cannabis (daggafari) culture of South Africa in relation to the history of cannabis laws and racism in South Africa. (See --) Renaming the article to Cannabis culture would not suffice because this is not a general article about global cannabis culture but the unique history of specific to the South African cannabis culture. Although some aspects of the Daggafari article can be found in Cannabis in South Africa it is not in violation of the content fork guidelines. Just how the hippie or beatnik culture is not in violation of the content fork guidelines. (see  & T--) Further more, the notability of the terms has since been lodged on the Talk:Daggafari#References for notability| talk page. Although the term is relatively new, it is a label that has been accepted & used by the dagga culture of South Africa in general as well as prominent figures in the South African cannabis culture such as the Dagga Couple and the Dagga Party of South Africa. The stigma surrounding dagga is still very much alive in South Africa and mainstream media prefer to use sensational word to describe the culture by using words like pothead etc thus it has not been covered by mainstream media. This shouldn't however be the only merit to determine notability. Furthermore the Afrikaans Language Commission is currently discussing to include the Afrikaans words for Daggafarian in the list of Afrikaans words. I do not believe the article should be deleted even if the consensus should be reached that the term is not notable as the article does not focus solely on the term but the subject or culture that the term refers to. I believe the nominator was wrong to delete the contents of this article and create a redirect to a poorly structured piece that itself needs a lot of work to present less of a list and more of an article. I don't think "reliable" sources can be found in a country that still revels in the stigma and pseudo-science of the subject, eg. where the reliable sources in the country publishes mostly unreliable pseudo-scientific and stigma pieces on the subject. This term is mostly used by the South African cannabis culture and is preferred over being called a pothead. Please consider the entire article and do not base your decisions solely on the word. Again the article can be adapted and should not be deleted as it contains critical info not contain in other articles and deals with a focused subject that does not appear in other articles. COI has been noted on the :af:Daggafarianisme article and it is what transformed it into its current shaped as I started learning more about Wikipedia guidelines. I am a fairly new user but am able to think for myself and apply myself neutrally to the subject. Other than the contesting of the title and main introduction this nomination carries no substance and should not result into a delete. Thus it appears the nominators reasoning is not based on Wikipedia guidelines but need for the removal of the implication of racist cannabis-Apartheid history of the subject. If you are able to follow the nomination for deletion of the Afrikaans :af:Wikipedia:Bladsyverwydering#Daggafarianisme | version this will be echoed in the sentiments where notability was not contested by the majority. (Mostly only the historic content relating to cannabis laws and racism was contested, also see the relating :af:Bespreking:Daggafarianisme | talk page EDITED -- Where the nomination was raised by a suspected sockpuppet
— User:MickeyDangerez, 11:31, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:SUBPOV||WP:RELAR||WP:RELART (Wikipedia:Content forking)