Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Wang Yue: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
DanS76 (talk | contribs)
DanS76 (talk | contribs)
Line 28: Line 28:
<s>::::You are a heartless monster. [[User:Speciate|Speciate]] ([[User talk:Speciate|talk]]) 21:06, 21 October 2011 (UTC)<s>
<s>::::You are a heartless monster. [[User:Speciate|Speciate]] ([[User talk:Speciate|talk]]) 21:06, 21 October 2011 (UTC)<s>
:::::How am i heartless? I feel sympathy for her parents, but i fail to see how she meets notability. It is a shame a child of such a young age was torn from the world. ''[[User: Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]]'' ([[User talk:Rusted AutoParts|talk]]) 21:11 21 October 2011 (UTC)
:::::How am i heartless? I feel sympathy for her parents, but i fail to see how she meets notability. It is a shame a child of such a young age was torn from the world. ''[[User: Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]]'' ([[User talk:Rusted AutoParts|talk]]) 21:11 21 October 2011 (UTC)
:::::: The article is not about her, its about the accident and its consequences. Keeping these 2 distinct is important. [[User:DanS76|DanS76]] ([[User talk:DanS76|talk]]) 21:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Most people (or cats) who die in hit and run accidents do not make the headlines all over the world or lead to calls for a fundamental reassessment of a country's culture. -- [[User:Necrothesp|Necrothesp]] ([[User talk:Necrothesp|talk]]) 16:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Most people (or cats) who die in hit and run accidents do not make the headlines all over the world or lead to calls for a fundamental reassessment of a country's culture. -- [[User:Necrothesp|Necrothesp]] ([[User talk:Necrothesp|talk]]) 16:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I've been here in China for months now and it isn't the Chinese media but "western news outlets [who have given] the story [http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/chinese-canadians-grieve-for-run-over-toddler-question-media-frenzy/article2206334/ top billing]"? Should they have? Perhaps not. But they did and Wikipedia's general philosophy has been to be a follower as opposed to a trail blazer it terms of what to cover and how. Generally our job is simply to assess the level of attention not whether it is warranted.--[[User:Bdell555|Brian Dell]] ([[User talk:Bdell555|talk]]) 17:36, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I've been here in China for months now and it isn't the Chinese media but "western news outlets [who have given] the story [http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/chinese-canadians-grieve-for-run-over-toddler-question-media-frenzy/article2206334/ top billing]"? Should they have? Perhaps not. But they did and Wikipedia's general philosophy has been to be a follower as opposed to a trail blazer it terms of what to cover and how. Generally our job is simply to assess the level of attention not whether it is warranted.--[[User:Bdell555|Brian Dell]] ([[User talk:Bdell555|talk]]) 17:36, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:35, 21 October 2011

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

Quite sad, but in no way notable. Many people die in hit and run accidents every year, what makes her different? Rusted AutoParts (talk) 15:11 21 October 2011 (UTC)

  • Delete, If there was a way to put this in an article about Chinese apathy or something similar (without breaching NPOV of course) then that would be good. But yes, this article is not notable, it's just another death amongst the tens of thousands that happen every day. (gonna check that statistic) Akjar13 (talk) 15:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The death has elicited wide-ranging media coverage around the world, clearly meets WP:GNG. Pundits are citing this incident as being symptomatic of a numbness and disengagement in Chinese society. WWGB (talk) 15:27, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Pundits are citing this incident as being symptomatic of a numbness and disengagement in Chinese society." -- this is aimless general speculation, nothing more, nothing less. Quis separabit? 21:21, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's a hot topic now, but in later years, it won't be. The child didn't do anything that spectacular to acheive article status. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 15:30 21 October 2011 (UTC)
  • KeepCrystal ball gazing such as predicting a falloff of coverage is not a legitimate tactic in AFD, since it is just the opinion of the editor. 8 days into coverage, it has not stopped. We can revisit in 6 months to see if it has the legs of the Kitty Genovese bystander apathy incident (people get stabbed all the time, ya know. What has made that incident special?). "Many people die in hit and run accidents," but their deaths do not get international coverage nor do they cause "a nationwide wave of mourning" in the worlds most populous nation, as this one did. Press coverage worldwide continues 8 days after the hit and run. "What makes her different" is that it is a particularly callous instance of bystander apathy and apparent indifference by the drivers who ran over her and drove on, resulting in the people of China questioning the "seeming lack of morality in Chinese society." Appears to satisfy the notability guideline Wikipedia:Notability (events) so far as one can judge this soon after the event. The article does is not a memorial, nor is it a biography,so the accomplishments or lack thereof of the toddler are irrelevant. The article properly covers the incident and its impact on Chinese society. Edison (talk) 15:37, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. WWGB (talk) 15:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. WWGB (talk) 15:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. WWGB (talk) 15:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DELETE: What happened is a tragedy but we all know that notability doesn't normally derive from being a victim. The circumstances of a death, killing or murder may be notable ("Death of..., Murder of..., etc.), but this one doesn't reach that threshold, in my humble estimation, notwithstanding a rare case of media hysteria in China.
"What makes her different is that it is a particularly callous instance of bystander apathy and apparent indifference by the drivers who ran over her and drove on, resulting in the people of China questioning the "seeming lack of morality in Chinese society ... -- the above paragraph is so POV and non-neutral it would be deleted from any article in which it was placed, except as a limited quotation.
"We can revisit in 6 months to see if it has the legs of the Kitty Genovese" -- Yes we can, so let's do so -- no need to create the article now then, by your own logic. Quis separabit? 16:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And no need to delete it now, either, just because we can undelete it in 6 months if the coverage continues. Are the servers half full, or half empty? Edison (talk) 16:38, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, sadly, they are all empty. If the article is notable now it will be notable in six months. Deleting an article through AFD is harder than creating one, as well you know. And in six months after everyone has forgotten about this poor little girl, except her family of course, and an AFD is made to delete the article then the same keep voters will be out in force to protect it, whereas if the article is notable in six months there will be nobody to criticize its creation. In fact I vow I will support the article if the incident is still in the public eye in 180 days. Quis separabit? 17:26, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:33, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:33, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's like saying a cat is notable because it was run over and was left there for 4 days. It's just a current shock news feed about a 2 year old girl, who hasn't done anything else notable in her saddly short life, who was hit by a car and ignored. This should either be merged with something or just plain deleted, because it doesn't have legs to be a standalone article. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 16:47 21 October 2011 (UTC)
A truly sickening comment. You should delete it. Speciate (talk) 20:18, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How is it? If her being hit by a car makes her notable, than every hit and run victim is too. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 20:36 21 October 2011 (UTC)

::::You are a heartless monster. Speciate (talk) 21:06, 21 October 2011 (UTC) [reply]

How am i heartless? I feel sympathy for her parents, but i fail to see how she meets notability. It is a shame a child of such a young age was torn from the world. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 21:11 21 October 2011 (UTC)
The article is not about her, its about the accident and its consequences. Keeping these 2 distinct is important. DanS76 (talk) 21:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Most people (or cats) who die in hit and run accidents do not make the headlines all over the world or lead to calls for a fundamental reassessment of a country's culture. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I've been here in China for months now and it isn't the Chinese media but "western news outlets [who have given] the story top billing"? Should they have? Perhaps not. But they did and Wikipedia's general philosophy has been to be a follower as opposed to a trail blazer it terms of what to cover and how. Generally our job is simply to assess the level of attention not whether it is warranted.--Brian Dell (talk) 17:36, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Secondary sources claim this is affecting the future direction of the People's Republic of China, with its 1.3 billion people. It has been compared to the Kitty Genovese case. Speciate (talk) 19:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Secondary sources claim..." constitutes WP:POV and WP:SPECULATION. Quis separabit? 21:21, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There are many similar cases around the world, there is no reason why this deserves its own article.-- Koresdcine (talk) 19:50, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Please identify the "many other cases" with an equivalent amount of worldwide coverage, and which are said to have influenced the psyche of a nation, which have no articles. Perhaps they also satisfy WP:EVENT and should have articles. A Los Angeles Times article says it is "the Chinese equivalent of the infamous 1964 murder of Kitty Genovese" and that the provincial leaders held 3 days of meetings to discuss the implications of the case. A group of lawyers are drafting a "Good Samaritan" law as a result of the case, to penalize people who fail to help in such a situation, and to indemnify them. Edison (talk) 19:54, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Scale of the coverage alone has been exceptional and makes this a notable subject for an article. I would compare it to the Tank Man article in terms of coverage, and also how it achieved significance when the subject seemed like one out of many similar incidences that undoubtly happened that day. Zhanzhao (talk) 20:44, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Very notable incident, fueled a lot of coverage and question by the media Worldwide — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.33.235.109 (talk) 21:12, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Wang Yue herself may not be notable before, but the coverage of the accident that lead to her death, and he discourse it led to, definitely meets the criteria for notability, considering the scope and scale of the coverage. DanS76 (talk) 21:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]