Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jasmine Revolution

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 keep. -- Cirt (talk) 19:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jasmine Revolution

Jasmine Revolution (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete, duplicates 2010–2011 Tunisian revolution   Cs32en Talk to me  08:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, no its not, it is widespread name for this international revolution, regarding China, Iran, Algeria, Yemen, Morocco... Keep, there are numerous sources on web for this name. Quite pointless nomination for me... Also, extremely important factor in "Colour revolution" geopolitical nomenclature. --WhiteWriter speaks 18:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, Jasmine revolution is not only related to Tunisia and it is giving jitters to many other countries affecting billions of lives. Thus the article need to be expanded instead of deleting. --Maheshkumaryadav (talk) 18:49, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the events in the Middle East and North Africa, as well as their effects on other countries, there is 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests.  Cs32en Talk to me  19:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong Delete (or redirect to 2010–2011 Tunisian revolution), completely redundant, copy and pasted over from the main protests article. There are no citations backing up the fact that these collective protests are so named the "Jasmine Revolution", only that Tunisia's was named so by Western media. No notability. No originality. No verifiability. Delete. --haha169 (talk) 19:47, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That is not right, Jasmine Revolution is name also for China, Iran, all named country. And we HAVE sources for that... :) --WhiteWriter speaks 20:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A Google | search on this topic will clearly how it a not a single country phenomena, but a greater than that, as world media is covering it for different countries.--Maheshkumaryadav (talk) 21:36, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You are using the same argument for each delete, that a separate article is needed for all the protests. Is that not what 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests is doing? Repetition... --75.28.160.165 (talk) 22:34, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to the Tunisian revolution - as it originally was. If, as the article indicates, the Chinese protests are also being called the Jasmine Revolution, a hatnote can be included in the Tunisia article. (Although the Chinese Jasmine Revolution article was created by the same user and is not very good.) Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:01, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Though it started in Tunisia, but it is doing revolutionary things in Egypt and other countries like China, thus it surely deserves a separate article.--Maheshkumaryadav (talk) 21:36, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Has received a great deal of press coverage this week. I don't think that it should be rolled in to the Tunisian article. I think it deserves an independent article.  Nipsonanomhmata  (Talk) 20:54, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No revolution has happened or is happening in China at this time. While the current protests that are taking place in China may be described in a separate article, that article cannot be named "Jasmine Revolution".  Cs32en Talk to me  21:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is just another name for the MENA protests, of which we already have an article on. There's no need to duplicate that information in another article just because it has a special name. A name that violates NPOV, by the way, considering you should be using a more neutral title and then just note in the first line that it is also referred to as the Jasmine Revolution. Either way, this article is unnecessary. SilverserenC 21:49, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Its not a history, the event is currently going on and millions or probably billions of people know it by 'jasmine revolution' as they read the name in media. As it is not related to a single country, so a separate article is needed, as other articles are related to particular countries.--Maheshkumaryadav (talk) 22:32, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Then the article should be just about the places having protests outside the MENA area. Which means you should remove everything but China and Algeria. Otherwise, you're just copying content that is already used in the MENA article. SilverserenC 22:39, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - This is now a worldwide phenomenon of sorts, and has spread out from the Arab world and the Middle East region. It deserves an article of it's own. The Scythian 21:50, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete per A10 This has been copied from the main article and pasted here under a title not agreed or discussed on. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:52, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
90% of the article's content are collected from internet from 10s of sites and is not copied. Sufficient references are also provided.--Maheshkumaryadav (talk) 22:27, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A great deal has been copied over from the main protest article, though some indeed were added. Well-referenced does not mean it wasn't copied... --haha169 (talk) 00:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to Redirect to 2010–2011 Tunisian revolution per below, the Jasmine revolution is another name given to the Tunisian revolution. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:36, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tunisian revolution is suggests that the movement and protests for that country, but this is becoming international in nature, so is better called 'Jasmine revolution' for international level, and 'Tunisian revolution' for that country specifically.--Maheshkumaryadav (talk) 12:48, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: As the term ″Jasmine Revolution″ becomes more popular and important a single page for it is important. dpw (talk) 22:04, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That does not even make sense and goes against WP:Crystal. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Except not every country THAT HAS BEEN INVOLVED has used the term "Jasmine Revolution" In Iran it is called the Green Movement, is there a source that is saying that in every country involved it is referred to the jasmine revolution or can this be a bit more POV? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:56, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
May I direct you to this wonderful little article: 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests. --haha169 (talk) 00:21, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Countries like China are not part of Middle East and North Africa, thus a separate articles name need to be 'Jasmine revolution', the other article might be merged with this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.117.145.248 (talk) 04:56, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article should be renamed.  Cs32en Talk to me  01:38, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
delete or merge with Tunisia protests. Article is either unsourced OR and thus POV or replicated ingo in an attemtp to be like the umprella page 2010-2011 Arab worldprotests.Lihaas (talk) 06:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Many OR edits.

174.24.197.143 (talk) 07:22, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. I'm not familiar enough with Wikipedia's policies and precedents to say definitively what should be done, but I do think we tread on eggshells by trying to determine the validity of a given label in current-events situations: Aside from the fact that the events are still developing, to have a Wikipedia article under a certain title reifies it in the minds of those who hear the term somewhere and inevitably end up on the Wikipedia article when they google it. For now it seems clear that this at least needs to be a disambiguation page or redirect with a disambiguation note, assuming the China article isn't deleted or merged. Whether there's enough to justify this being a separate article or it needs to be merged with 'Tunisia Effect' or some other solution, I'm not sure. Gonfalone (talk) 09:28, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect seems to be what the outcome of this discussion will be. Which is good, because that just means that we are saying that the subject doesn't meet notability standards for now. If more events happen later, then the redirect can just be reverted, so all the old content is back in the article and the new content can be added. So, if more stuff does end up happening, then this is just a temporary thing. If nothing further does happen, then it's a moot point anyways. SilverserenC 09:43, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests. The only non-MENA regions mentioned here are China and Iran, of which the Iran section does not have any references. Even some of the other sections are problematic, for example, ref 30 for Libya says "...he had openly worried about during Tunisia's Jasmine Revolution." Nowhere in the reference is the phrase Jasmine revolution explicitly used to describe the Libyan revolt. Other sections may also have similar problems. Maybe we should include a line in the MENA article saying "the term Jasmine revolution was used to describe some of these" or something to that effect. SPat talk 11:20, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests per SPat. Kmusser (talk) 17:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or redirect per Silver seren. Moreover, there are some significant issues regarding verifiability and original research. Also, as somebody has pointed out above, several articles with the same content under different names are popping up. If not a deletion, my second choice would be to redirect to 2011 Chinese protests, as that looks like it's going to be kept, and as which is the origin and is a by-product of the 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests. –MuZemike 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep. Redirecting to 2010–2011 Tunisian revolution obviously doesn't work as the article discussed various countries. Redirecting to 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests also doesn't work because we got China in this issue (which is pretty clear that China is not in Middle East nor North Africa). OhanaUnitedTalk page 20:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • If there are multiple items called by the same name, then it should be a disambiguation page, but not a single article talking about disperate events. Active Banana (bananaphone 21:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Consider "White Revolution". This is a nickname for the Egyptian Revolution of 2011 and the Iranian reforms of 1963. Just because two revolutions share a name, doesn't mean we must create a separate article talking about how they share a name. Sure, we can mention in the Tunisian Revolution article its impact in China, but that doesn't warrant two articles, one about Tunisian Revolution and the other about Tunisian Revolution and its influence on a similar movement that didn't even materialize in China. 140.180.14.79 (talk) 22:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very strong Delete/Redirect Oh my dear god, either people have no knowledge of the present situation, or haven't read the article at all. First of all, there are only two revolutions called "Jasmine Revolution" by at least numerous sources, one in China and Tunisia, not the however many present in the article. As someone mentioned, in Iran, the nickname is "Green Revolution". Keeping this doesn't makes ANY SENSE. The Chinese one is not even a real revolution. NOTHING happened. As in, just a bunch of police showed up and some people who didn't really do anything. That's it. We can mention the effect of the Tunisian Revolution on China in the 2010-2011 Tunisian Revolution sure. But stop creating almost identical wikipedia articles for no reason. 140.180.14.79 (talk) 22:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests._ morde t .. 12:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect or delete outright to the Tunisian article; the term has no notable relevance or connection to anything else, this is just made-up nonsense. Tarc (talk) 17:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Bloomburg journalist are connecting the Middle East revolutions with the Chinese Jasmine protests. ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 08:29, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • A Bloomberg journalist saying x, y and z means absolutely nothing. Journalists are not "hurr experts in geopolitifications" like you claim them to be. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 06:12, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all of these articles on the collective events into one. We need an article to describe the events as a whole, but what it should be named remains to be seen. Let's see if anything pops up between now and the AfD. Throwaway85 (talk) 04:42, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or merge: Redundant, and has the potential for widening a POV fork. The association of many unrelated protests (i.e., that of the "protests" in China and demonstrations in Tunisia) is WP:OR. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 06:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep This is an ongoing event and the fact everyone is overlooking is that the nomenclature is still very fluid as to what exactly this whole thing might be called. This article should be kept if but to be developed into one covering the collective protests that have flared up and been inspired by one another, facilitated by increased internet usage by those involved. The advantage to having a non-geographic home article is that, since the protests can seemingly pop up anywhere - and have - until the protests have concluded, it's very difficult to give them a comprehensively-named article, not to mention how clunky such a titled article would be ('Pan-African-China-Middle East Protest Movement Via Twitter'). While it may not be the most globally used term, it is an identifiable one, and with more usage may very well become the accepted term for these events in a world context. Yes, each one may have a different variation on the naming, but this thing, as of yet, does not have one big, overarching title. Let's give it one and develop the article from there, and if it ends up being known by some other term, rename it at that time ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crtrue (talk • contribs) 07:23, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yet even so, the title "Pan-African-China-Middle East Protest Movement Via Twitter" is still WP:OR simply because it has the word "China" in it. There are many scuffles in China every year, and as said time and time again, linking the most recent one with the Middle East protests is entirely WP:OR. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 07:52, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Except, journalists themselves are linking the current protests in China with what is going on in the Middle East. So, if there is any OR it is by the subject matter experts in the field themselves. I saw a journalist on MSNBC just today link Chinese protests with Middle East rebellions/revolutions.*shrug* Right now the situation is fluid, I recommend keeping the article on that basis, and if any revision needs to happen going forward then it can be at a later time. Right now, I'm seeing ... from the prospect of watching news coverage here, the undeniable linking of the two.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 09:02, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
This is because the removal of contents from this discussion, together with blanking of the article and replacing it with a redirect, may have prevented participation by some editors. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JamesBWatson (talk) 10:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

KEEP : - For long the people of china have longed for human rights. Democracy is the only way this could be ensured. More and more articles on Jasmine Revolution should be kept to increase the visibility of the revolution and the cause. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ActiveSaurabh (talk • contribs) 06:20, 4 March 2011 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jasmine_Revolution&oldid=1146309587"