Talk:Michael Kovrig

Reply to Notability

 * oppose I disagree, WP:BLP1E refers to incidents more akin to 15 minutes of fame, if you engage in a rigid interpretation, how would Malala Yusuf fit in the category? I agree that many cases might not be clear cut, however, in the case of two Michaels, especially taking into consideration it is ON-GOING, it goes without saying the importance to keep individual entries as they are indeed relevant background of the larger events at play. ElleShd (talk) 23:35, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Notability / merge proposal
As per WP:BLP1E, I'm wondering if this article meets Wikipedia's notability threshold. The capture of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor are important events worthy of inclusion in the encyclopedia because of their significance in a broader saga about the extradition of Meng Wanzhou and the breakdown in Canada-China relations, but the individuals themselves are not especially notable for anything other than being pawns in a sad geopolitical power struggle.

This might be said of other political prisoners, of course, and there's a good argument to be made for having stand-alone articles. But it may be more useful to have an article about Detention of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor or something, which would also allow for a broader discussion about the surrounding context and ramifications. The Blue Canoe  00:20, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Surely you have a point and could create such an article, but I would prefer to see both individual articles stand separately just as Meng Wanzhou's article stands separately.LFlagg (talk) 03:30, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Meng Wanzhou had preexisting notability for other reasons outside of this situation. Bearcat (talk) 23:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Maybe we should get rid of every page about Korea as well, because neither country is that notable and the Korean War is usually dismissed as the "forgotten war." Daehanmindecline (talk) 14:28, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Not a relevant comparison. Combining reductio ad absurdum with slippery slope-ism is a logical fallacy, not a credible argument. Bearcat (talk) 23:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Support. There isn't a compelling reason why we would need an article about the incident and separate standalone BLPs of Spavor and Kovrig as individuals. Neither of them were independently notable before the detention incident, so the detention incident just makes them WP:BLP1Es. Bearcat (talk) 23:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Procedural rejection this is the wrong place to discuss this, since this unduly biases the discussion towards the issues of Kovrig, with less attention to Spavor. Either this should be discussed in the Detention article, or each Michael should be discussed separately. The issues surrounding diplomat Kovrig are also much different than just being detained in relation to Meng, rather it concerns the treatment of former diplomats and the issues concerning their time as diplomats. Meanwhile, the Spavor article does not have this issue, so they should not be linked to only Kovrig issues, having this discussion appear on this one Michael page instead of the target. -- 65.92.244.147 (talk) 20:38, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Closed with no merge for Spavor, as independent notability argued (here and elsewhere); continuing discussion for Kovrig, as there doesn't seem to be agreement yet. Klbrain (talk) 06:05, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

I have removed misformatted merge notice which suggested this should be merged to... itself. (Perhaps the intended target was Michael Spavor?). If someone wants to rename this, please use WP:RM. If there are concerns over whether this article should exist at all, perhaps due to notability issues, please use WP:AFD. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:23, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I've added the merge template back, correctly this time I hope. The argument is that Michael Kovrig is not independently notable, and hence should be merged to the event Detention of Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig. It is more efficient to maintain one good article than two (or three) mediocre ones. Klbrain (talk) 20:38, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

I support merging these articles - neither Spavor nor Kovrig is sufficiently notable to warrant their own pages separate from the article about their detention. newmila (talk) 01:08, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * For Kovrig, ✅ Klbrain (talk) 10:44, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

To add to article
To add to this article: Kovrig just learned, in early October 2020, about the extent of the coronavirus pandemic. Source 173.88.246.138 (talk) 06:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

hungarian citizenship
Is this verifiable? (Sorry it is in Hungarian) https://telex.hu/kulfold/2021/03/22/kulfold-kina-kemkedes-michael-kovrig — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.46.86.3 (talk) 10:46, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Separate article
I believe that Kovrig is independently notable at this point and should be separated from the main article? CaffeinAddict (talk) 15:05, 30 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree and I have suggested this on the talk page of the detention article. I tried to create a page for Kovrig but it was merged back to the detention page. Adam Scolin (talk) 14:52, 14 March 2022 (UTC)