Talk:Google worker organization

Additional sources
Going to add here instead of bloating the Further reading section:





czar 00:45, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , you can use template:refideas in the future instead of creating a discussion section. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If there are only a few sources perhaps, but not when there are dozens. czar  06:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Alphabet Workers Union into Google worker organization
The AWU is not independently notable from the last year of worker organization at Google. These articles cover the same scope. If coverage of the AWU comes to eclipse all other worker organization at Google, then we would discuss renaming the article, but while the union itself was just announced, the scope of these two articles are functionally one and the same. czar 05:18, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Oppose. The AWU is a specific organization and media coverage recently has been overwhelmingly about the AWU -- it is very notable because it has received a lot of media coverage. There is a lot that is specific to AWU, such as its specific positions, its specific actions, etc. And as time goes on, even more specifics start. Oklam39 (talk) 06:11, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Also Oppose for the same reason. AWU has a specific organizing philosophy which differentiates itself. That philosophy and the AWU as a whole has been discussed in the media separately from previous efforts.--User:Namiba 18:31, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * No one will doubt that there is coverage of the AWU. The point is that prior to last week, there was also plenty of coverage about the general pre-union movement, which is now part of the union's history if the union is seen as the inheritor of that legacy. Since this is yet to be determined and both articles have the same scope, it should be covered in the same place until a split is warranted. czar  18:34, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The union declares itself the inheritor of that legacy but that doesn't mean they aren't separate subjects. The history of workers fighting at Google is not the same as the AWU. The AWU is a specific organization while history is history. That's why there's different articles for "government of X country" and "history of X", etc. Oklam39 (talk) 20:06, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Comment It is potentially WP:SYNTH to say that AWU is an extension of Google organizing. On other hand, for things like a timeline, it’s definitely useful to have Union actions side by side with potentially other Google worker organizing that isn’t AWU specific. Shushugah (talk) 21:25, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Oppose - The AWU is a specific union. This article covers worker organization in general. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Oppose since AWU is about a specific union, like others have mentioned here. User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 17:19, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Oppose Both topics are distinct and each passes WP:GNG. The union organization is new, and I think the argument for merging is a judgement call that the recent news is only passing and the ongoing story will be worker organization. I disagree with this, because Google is prominent enough and the media history is rich enough to expect future media coverage of both. Not all worker organization at Google will be part of the union, and also, the institutional details about the union which the media is already reporting do not fit neatly as worker organization.  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  23:35, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Oppose per the others. If Google worker organization were to have a section about worker organizations, it would need to reflect a world view beyond the USA/Canada. Currently AWU does receive the most reliable secondary coverage, so for that additional reason, makes sense to have it as a separate article. An update to one article will undoubtedly require an update to another, which does add some editing hurdles. Shushugah (talk) 20:36, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Support. --Greysonsarch (talk) 18:53, 6 April 2021 (UTC)