Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hong Kong unification movement with the United Kingdom

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 speedy deletion (A1). Non-admin closure. AllyD (talk) 06:53, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong unification movement with the United Kingdom[edit]

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

Unsourced, uncatgorized, article, merge with Hong Kong 1 July marches Murry1975 (talk) 09:46, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:57, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:57, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

HK-UK unification is not the goal of the July 1 marches, unlike what the article implies. But the waving of colonial era HK flags in protests is very common and not just on July 1st, usually to protest against central government interference in Hong Kong or against the CCP or China in general (i.e. anti-China not pro-Britain). There are articles about this from many sources, e.g. http://asiancorrespondent.com/96293/disgruntled-hong-kong-embraces-union-jack-as-symbol-of-freedom/ , http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1074458/hong-kong-chief-executive-urges-people-not-wave-colonial-flag?page=all , so perhaps this issue deserves an article? 114.252.69.114 (talk) 18:29, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Just a few people waving UK flags in a demo does not imply that there's a "movement". There are absolutely no RS on such "movement". STSC (talk) 02:42, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:17, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:39, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion - Unsourced original research, and lack of context as per CSD A1. STSC (talk) 03:19, 21 July 2013 (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.