Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2019 Sri Lankan Swiss embassy controversy

Add links
From 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 merge to 2019 in Sri Lanka. target per suggestion of article creator. It's not set in stone. Spartaz Humbug! 21:48, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019 Sri Lankan Swiss embassy controversy[edit]

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

2019 Sri Lankan Swiss embassy controversy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:30, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:30, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:30, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:30, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I created the article but I was not WP:TOOEARLY as the issue began on 25 November. I created with the assumption that the news will be further updated and develpoed in coming days. I will agree upon what fellow Wikipedians think about this nomination. Thank you. Abishe (talk) 11:55, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as zero case has been presented for why it should be removed. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep WP:SNOW the article is well developed and has enough in-depth, quality sourcing to pass WP:GNG with flying colors. Recommend closing this quickly. This doesn't need a week's debate. --Jayron32 14:45, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I can't find a reason why this article should be deleted, and the nominator certainly doesn't provide a compelling argument otherwise ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 15:24, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep The Afd can be similarly treated to this Afd on Embassy of Indonesia, Colombo. I can recommend the article to merge with Sri Lanka-Switzerland relations. I don't think there is much specialty about this article but the content is supported well with refs. rupa$$$ (talk) 16:00, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge I guess this is sensibly stupid. Look at the Murder of Yvonne Jonsson which was a prolonged issue between Sweden and Sri Lanka since that Royal Park murder in 2005. The convict was given Presidential pardon by former outgoing President Maithripala Sirisena and the issue is over. This too will soon finish within few days. It will be pointless and waste of time to have such an article. Better to merge with 2019 in Sri Lanka. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.157.216.89 (talk) 16:37, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I don't see this as a WP:ROUTINE event and this clearly passes GNG. Not a major reason to delete. Juxlos (talk) 17:19, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge a few sentences to Sri Lanka–Switzerland relations. This is a minor diplomatic tiff that is not going to rate a footnote in the history books. It's generating some short term news coverage but the long term significance is likely to be somewhere near zero and it fails the WP:10YT test. See also WP:Recentism. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:28, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    As that article has no other content, it would immediately fail WP:WEIGHT (which, unlike 10YT, is actual policy). Jeez, it'd make more sense to AfD the "relations" article (not suggesting we actually do so). GreatCaesarsGhost 19:39, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    10YT is an explanatory supplement to the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not policies. It carries a certain amount of weight in its own right, given it is a distillation of several policies. - SchroCat (talk) 13:34, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per NOTNEWS and TOOSOON. If the story ever goes beyond a sequence of news stories then there could be an article, but right now this is a news story that nobody may care about in coming years. Mangoe (talk) 21:29, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Are you serious? Nominating a well sourced article for AFD without even bothering to elaborate on your reasoning? Please show some respect to other editors' work, even if you think it's worthless. -Zanhe (talk) 00:58, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can see, the OP's statement contains a rational, as do all of the various comments favoring either a merge or deletion. However, I am not seeing much of a WP:PAG based rational for keeping the page on your comment. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:07, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No apparent consensus to delete; try a re-list to see if a later desire lean to Merge (over Keep) persists
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Britishfinance (talk) 20:15, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per Ad Orientem. Lepricavark (talk) 16:34, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep 22 mostly high quality sources passes WP:SIGCOV. WP:NTEMP. No continued coverage needed. Lightburst (talk) 02:16, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Summerise it and merge with the Swiss relations page. - UmdP 11:02, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As the article creator I take the blame for creating this article and I agree with WP:NOTNEWS policy. However I feel sources such as BBC and New York Times continue to give updates regarding the incident but not on regular basis. The local Sri Lankan sources are regularly updating the incident. The officials have also revealed the name of the woman staff Gania Banister Francis which was confirmed by Swiss authorities. Actually she was initially considered as the aggrieved party and then she is accused of playing a blunder regarding the incident and has also been arrested. In this case, both the victim and accuser is the same person (Gania Banister Francis). I think it is better to merge the article and I take the responsibility for creating article like this. Abishe (talk) 06:04, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's clearly both notable and has ongoing coverage. I would go along with either a keep or a merge. Bearian (talk) 15:52, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - we need more useful information on Wikipedia, not less. This is an ongoing story with several hooks. Switzerland wants to deal with the past [1] and is doubting the rule of law in Sri Lanka [2]. Newly-elected president Rajapaksa does not want to deal with the past [3] and takes the incident personally [4]. Wakari07 (talk) 23:08, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I never thought this Afd would go so long. The embassy issue is a serious legal case. The incident is actually notable as it is still regarded as ongoing legal case in Sri Lanka. Prior to this case, the bond between Sri Lanka and Switzerland have always been controversial ever since the end of 2009 civil war. Tamils have seeked asylum mostly in Switzerland and this has caused rifts between the two nations. I also remember there was another pending legal case on Murder of Yvonne Jonsson who was a Swedish young girl who was murdered in Royal Park, Colombo in 2005. The former President gave pardon to the perpetrator and it caused some sort of issues between Sweden and Sri Lanka. The Swiss embassy case is somewhat similar this. Some reports allege it was Swiss authorities who used Gania Banister Francis as a propaganda to further aggravate the situation between two nations. I don't know who really started this issue first and I contributed to this article by maintaining WP:NPOV. But I am facing severe backlash and criticsms from the outsiders for being the author of this article. I also might face legal consequences for creating article of this kind. This case might not be much covered like the Impeachment of Donald Trump, death penalty of Pervez Musharraf or the Indian Citizenship Amendment Act protests but still I assure Sri Lankan Swiss embassy controversy is very much notable. Its up to the admins to decide upon this. Abishe (talk) 04:03, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge whatever can be salvaged per WP:V, and it wouldn't be small game, to Sri Lanka–Switzerland relations, per nomination. Editors demanding more text from the nominator confuse substance with quantity: Invoking a specific policy can be enough; there's no obligation for elaboration. The article's subject fails the criteria for a stand-alone Wikipedia entry per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:TOOSOON, as even the article's creator acknowldeged above. Let's think WP:10YT but meanwhile let's merge. -The Gnome (talk) 21:26, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect to Sri Lanka–Switzerland relations. The information can fully remain in the encyclopedia that way, but in the context of the more important subject of the relationship between the countries. BD2412 T 23:11, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Self merge I have come to this conclusion after looking at the recent proposals made by fellow editors ever since relisting the discussion. I myself came to this conclusion in order to give my fullest cooperation to the admins. I have created articles such as 2019 cyberattacks on Sri Lanka, 2019 railway strike in Sri Lanka which are even smaller than this article. I prefer this to be merged with 2019 in Sri Lanka over Sri Lanka–Switzerland relations because the list article is much bigger than the latter. I thought instead of reaching No concensus result its better to go with either 'Merge or Keep. The discussion has caused dilemma and I leave it to admins to take final decision. Here after I feel no point in engaging myself into this discussion. Abishe (talk) 04:23, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment According to this serious overview article [5] in the SL Sunday Times, according to a diplomatic source, European Union envoys back the Swiss position. The victim-turned-suspect is still in prison. Wakari07 (talk) 19:33, 22 December 2019 (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/2019_Sri_Lankan_Swiss_embassy_controversy&oldid=952415320"