Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XXII International AIDS Conference, 2018

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 International AIDS Society. Sandstein 21:06, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

XXII International AIDS Conference, 2018[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Individual conferences of this sort are not notable: a much better choice is an article about the series DGG ( talk ) 16:14, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment User:DGG I agree and support your nomination on the basis of WP:GNG. I also assert this is likely in violation regarding WP:NOTPROMOTION. LikeMeercats (talk) 16:36, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:28, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:28, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Doc James: Please may you weigh in. When I created this article I followed the example of editors who had already created separate articles for this conference dating back to 1987. Could this, tagging for deletion, be an indicator of systematic bias, since the disease disproportionately affects low-income countries? An individual season of Game of Thrones (season 1) has its own article. Not only that, each individual episode of a season has its own page: like Winter Is Coming. Ear-phone (talk) 00:02, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe merge here than International AIDS Society? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:33, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think the above comment really detracts from the matter at hand here. In no way is this discussion about politics or against low-income people. We should strive to be civil and objective - not on a mission. The comparison to Game of Thrones is a major false equivalency. LikeMeercats (talk) 21:56, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 18:46, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - to International AIDS Society - I've added in some additional content on its 2018 note of the conference. The article includes a decent section on the conferences. This specific article doesn't appear to satisfy notability and certainly isn't a justified contentfork, though an article on the series of conferences would be, and would be a reasonable CONTENTFORK. Nosebagbear (talk) 18:48, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 (talk) 18:48, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Status Query - While I think, strictly speaking, this was purely a split between 2 deletes and a redirect it seemed worthwhile to go through what the "!votes" currently are. Obviously Ear-Phone was for, despite the "comment" beginning, but as a Sock his !vote shouldn't be counted. @Doc James: noted that a merge would be in order, but I suspect he may have been either busy or somewhat reticent to be dragged in because there isn't a formal justification. I think merge was the best one at the time, but post edit a redirect seems best - please let me know if you think a more extensive merge is still preferable. It would also be great if the deletes, @DGG and LikeMeercats: could say if they feel there is a specific reason not to redirect so we can also discuss that. Cheers :) Nosebagbear (talk) 19:10, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Nosebagbear: Firstly, I have removed the sock comments to clear the things up here. Technically, this article can be *both* deleted and redirected. But I guess that is what another week will be used for, to clarify what type of removing the article we want. Pure redirect? Pure delete? Delete and redirect? Merge? Also LikeMeercats techinically does not count for a delete !vote (yet) because of pure commenting (although the context is pretty clear). Jovanmilic97 (talk) 19:19, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jovanmilic97: - I assume you mean "does not count for a *merge* !vote" Nosebagbear (talk)

@Nosebagbear: - I agree and support your nomination does not sound like merge here, that is what Doc James did. Per wiki guidelines discussions and nomination brought here are for deletion (what consensus delivers is other thing). So yeah, seems like a Delete-Merge-Redirect trio situation here. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 19:46, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jovanmilic97: - as far as I can tell that statement is by LikeMeercats, Doc James wrote "Maybe merge here than International AIDS Society?" directly below (in the new, altered version). Nosebagbear (talk) 20:07, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Nosebagbear: - Checking it, Doc was actually pinged by the now blocked sock to tell his opinion to which he replied as merge per https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/XXII_International_AIDS_Conference,_2018&oldid=868831763 but is not seen as that because someone added tags in meanwhile separating comments, will restore that comment just as a notice and clarity Jovanmilic97 (talk) 20:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a redirect to the society as DocJames suggested is a good first step; there is nothing here that needs merging. (for the other conferences, we need to check if there's anything worth merging, but if not they should just be redirected also.It might as a later step be possible to split into an article on the conference series. DGG ( talk ) 20:40, 14 November 2018 (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.