Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 Shaanxi dog massacre


 * 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   Keep with rename. Fritzpoll (talk) 20:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 
 * 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   keep. Seems that there are no issues after renaming anymore. Tone 20:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

2009 Shaanxi dog massacre

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

No English-language sources are provided. While this does not mean that the incident in question is not factual, it does make verifying it exceedingly difficult. The term "2009 shaanxi dog massacre" turns up a batch of hits on Google, but these primarily stem from various terms combining with discussions of the Nanking Massacre. Furthermore, the article is exceedingly poorly written and seems to have a definite bias against the government's actions. At the very least this article needs a massive rewrite and the provision of a more NPOV title, and even then I'm not sure if a government initiative by a single county in China meets with notability. Tyrenon (talk) 07:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Unsure - Is the event that notable? --  李博杰    | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 08:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The event is notable, how often does the government kill 20000 dogs? Other news sources: Digital Journal, Scotsman, Straits Times, Reuters, etc. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 08:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I began fixing up the article a bit. Now the title, I was thinking maybe 2009 Shaanxi rabies wave or something. ViperSnake151 Talk  11:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That seems like a better article title. "dog massacre" may come across as POV. If the government is handing out vaccinations for pet owners, and culling stray dogs, it is a "cull", not an "extermination" or "massacre", regardless of the numbers killed, and as per WP policy, regardless of popular branding and what the media says. Such words can be taken in the wrong way; it would be like comparing the incident with the Nanking Massacre. There is no wrong in culling if it is done in an appropriate manner, refer to the 2009 Canberra, Australia Kangaroo culling. Also, be wary of exaggerations and personal influences in media sources. It is best to refer to a report which provides the information without a strong POV. --  李博杰    | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 13:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree with User:benlisquare, the title and the text in the article give the appearance of op-ed and not NPOV, so the article needs editing, but as far as the AfD goes, it's a keep. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 15:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, Wikipedia is not the news. Stifle (talk) 08:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Second choice is to rename to something more neutral, because it's questionable that the term "massacre" meets WP:NPOV. Stifle (talk) 12:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep & rename If rabies is the most deadly thing going, then this needs to be reported like the swine flu. Now I am not saying it doesn't currently sound at least a little biased.  It does.  But the original articles available yesterday called it a "massacre" in chinese news. Today there appears to be more english sources appearing if you need more references. To make this more encyclopedic, please dig up similar 2007 events. Maybe people should research the national four pests campaign to see how those got started. Please rename the article. Benjwong (talk) 12:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'd agree if it were on more than a local scale.  The problem is that per the article ( and as I said, English-language sourcing is hard to find Well, we got one source that's solid), it's just one county.  Though it is a lot of dogs, this is no more notable than my old neighborhood holding a deer cull every few years to prevent car crashes.Tyrenon (talk) 19:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not a newspaper. If kept, the POV title should be changed to 2009 Shaanxi rabies outbreak, since the cull was just one measure taken, along with mass vaccination, after 8 people died of rabies in a few weeks. Edison (talk) 16:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename per Benjwong Ngchen (talk) 17:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 18:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Leaning to keep, perhaps merging with similar articles (after the Great sparrow campaign I'd presume it happened in other regions of China too). 20 thousand pests in a 4-million city, IMO, don't count as a massacre and the article says that leashed domestic dog were not hurt, so rename as suggested above. NVO (talk) 18:55, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and consider a rename We cover all major disease outbreaks, but the title is POV. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 20:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The article is not about the rabies outbreak but about the killing of the dogs. This happens in China often, not rarely, and the article can be about that.  Rabies is endemic in rural China and an article about rabies in China, where fatal rabies cases are traced to dog bites 95% of the time, could be written, even an article solely about dog rabies in China.  This article is about the dog killing, though, not about the rabies outbreak.  I think it would be better to have a general article about dog slaughters in response to rabies outbreaks in China rather than an article about each specific episode.  In Beijing over 200,000 dogs were killed over a period of years in the early 90s in response to rabies cases.  "Culling" implies removing something but leaving something behind.  As the stated goal of the county government is not to leave any dogs behind it can't properly be called "culling," but must have a title to reflect the killing.  It seems like just as much a POV to attempt to call the killing of 50,000 dogs something nice as to call it a massacre.  I suggest slaughter.  Although usually used to imply both the killing and the butchering, it can also mean just the killing.  --69.226.103.13 (talk) 01:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Regardless of numbers, culling is culling. 4,000 Kangaroos killed in Australia is a cull. 50,000 dogs killed in Shaanxi is a cull. An argument over the English definition of "cull" is null, void and pointless. Culls are any "killing" of an animal in significant numbers due to a credible reason by those responsible. For example, the Department of Defense in Australia culled kangaroos because they were taking up defense property, and that the winter would have killed them off anyway due to cold and starvation. Culls are perfectly normal occurrences when done by local governments. --  李博杰    | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 09:36, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No, discussion about wording meaning when writing an encyclopedia are never "null, void and pointless." While debating whether or not to delete or rename this article is the perfect time to debate and make certain of the meaning of words used in the article.  However, I'm not arguing with you.  I'm simply offering some points for consideration.  --69.226.103.13 (talk) 17:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Rename to 2009 Shaanxi dog-free zone

 * Agree: I am supporting this name because that is the goal.  If they succeed, every other province will follow them.  "Culling" here is a total contradiction.  The government is claiming to protect the people.  Meanwhile they are sending ordinary citizens out to do the killing, exposing them directly to the dogs. Culling is very systematic, and does not attempt to wipe out an entire species in a region.  As a "rabies outbreak", not one source has mentioned bats, wolves, foxes.  Is dog the only animal in shaanxi??  This is basically a very cheap extermination process.  The government is saying they have free vaccines, but encourage people to go out with bats. While I don't want to see people get bitten, and most netizens are fed up with the process (like another 2006 repeat).  This is a less POV pushing name. Benjwong (talk) 04:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The article is still about the killing of the dogs not about the "dog-free zone" goal of the county, and the title should reflect what the article is about. Maybe "eradication?"
 * China has a comparatively high incidence of rabies bites and deaths, and 95% of the bites are from rabid dogs, and 95% of the deaths due to rabies in China are from dogs. Past campaigns in China that have vaccinated and killed dogs have drastically lowered the death rate from rabies in China.  In addition, the death rate has risen coincident with increases in dog populations.  I wish some of the articles had discussed the humans handling potentially rabid dogs in this manner, because 2 of the deaths I read about were victims who had butchered, cooked, and eaten infected dogs.  Others who ate the dog meat they had prepared did not come down with rabies, just the two had actually killed the dogs and butchered the meat.  But I could not find any news articles or sources that discuss the risks associated with handling of dogs while killing them in such a manner.   --69.226.103.13 (talk) 04:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I am just not going to touch the article until there is a final name change. Isn't calling it a "slaughter" abit POV like "massacre". Do you have another name in mind?  The article will mention more about the rabies, though that view is coming more from delayed western reporting IMHO. I was thinking the concept of dog-free county is what is unique here to make this notable in the first place. Benjwong (talk) 05:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The page was moved to less POV name 2009 Shaanxi dog-free zone after no more complaints for 3 days. Benjwong (talk) 05:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 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.
 * 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.