Talk:RYB Education

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedy deleted as an attack or a negative unsourced biography of a living person, because it is well-sourced and it is about an organization rather than a person. --Yejianfei (talk) 00:07, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Overly detailed
This article is about the company, while section "Disputes" is unduly long and too detailed. It should be downsized per WP:Not News and WP:Weight. If the November 2017 "toddler abuse" incident is notable enough, it should be spun off to a separate article. --Neo-Jay (talk) 02:44, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You have a point. Chinese Wikipedia also has a debate whether those incidents should be separated into another article. Actually, you can see the template on the top of that article. --Yejianfei (talk) 05:35, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your information. So what should we do now? --Neo-Jay (talk) 08:02, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Possibly try forking the event, or ask for sure on the village pump. I am not quite sure. I am still waiting for the final decision of the 红黄蓝教育 article on Chinese Wikipedia. --Yejianfei (talk) 14:28, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 04:47, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

The problem about overly detailed is because almost all the original reports and pictures were either deleted or censored. Parents arrested and silenced and no one are allowed to bring this up. Chinese Wikipedia seems to be one of the very few options that they can talk about those incidents freely without censorship. There are lots of rumors and debates because of the lack of transparency, the contradictory statements before and after, and the government's enthusiasm for censorship. That why Chinese Wikipedia has many overly detailed disputes. This is just one example. Jojozhang21 (talk) 15:14, 4 July 2021 (UTC)