Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2019–20 novel coronavirus outbreak


 * 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 keep. This is not the correct forum to discuss a page move (or fork as this user calls it), and furthermore, pages should not be forked in this way, as the edit history is not preserved. Redirecting 2019–20 novel coronavirus outbreak to 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak.

Please see Requested moves for how to correctly move a page. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 02:28, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

2019–20 novel coronavirus outbreak

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is a forked version from 2019–20_Wuhan_coronavirus_outbreak per WP:SUBPOV. I am AfD'ing this article to put my SUBPOV argument into contest. xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 01:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  xinbenlv  Talk, Remember to "ping" me 01:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  xinbenlv  Talk, Remember to "ping" me 01:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)


 * keep 2019–20_novel_coronavirus_outbreak and delete 2019–20_Wuhan_coronavirus_outbreak The SUBPOV-fork argument is that "Wuhan" here refer to the province of Wuhan. Just like we won't call this a "China" outbreak if we are in China, and we won't call this a "Earth" outbreak if we live on Earth, it's a questionable subject calling this concept a "Wuhan" outbreak because only people who are not in Wuhan will call it a Wuhan outbreak. Therefore, I challenge the subject 2019–20_Wuhan_coronavirus_outbreak having a POV bias, and ask either keep both articles or remove the Wuhan one. I am open to be convinced. (COI: nominator) xinbenlv  Talk, Remember to "ping" me 01:49, 11 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters. —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 01:58, 11 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep 2019–20_Wuhan_coronavirus_outbreak and delete 2019–20_novel_coronavirus_outbreak. This has been discussed at length already in the move debates. Now an end around has occurred. Crazy. As discussed the common name for this outbreak has been Wuhan coronavirus. Similarly geographically named such as the Spanish flu and Ebola viruses were also name for their geographic outbreak areas (though Spanish flu was a bit of a misnomer). Krazytea  (talk) 02:03, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * thanks for joining that discussion. I argue WP:COMMONNAME doesn't apply to this debate because I am challenging the POV. If your use Spanish flu as an example, see it's Spanish Wiki version is called es:Pandemia de gripe de 1918 which is not "Spanish flu". Historically English was not used with this global adoption back when Spanish flu outbroke, it's OK that all people who spoke English at the time call it a Spanish flu. Nowa days with English spoken in even Wuhan, it's failed to represents NPOV being called a "Wuhan outbreak" in English xinbenlv  Talk, Remember to "ping" me 02:09, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I completely agree with The name Wuhan coronavirus is in conventional use. You are free to suggest a name change by showing how else it is conventionally referred to in the media, but the only other name I am aware of is just "coronavirus", which isn't suitable. Commonsense suggests calling it by the simplest and most easily recognisable name in English. English is not spoken very fluently throughout most of mainland China, so for most of the Anglosphere, "Wuhan" is a clear designator. IBE (talk) 02:16, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep 2019-20_novel_coronavirus_outbreak and delete 2019-20_Wuhan_coronavirus_outbreak The term 'coronavirus' refers to an entire family of SARS-like viruses. The novel coronavirus identifies the specific strain of the virus in the outbreak. I suppose you could also merge the two titles if one ever so desires. 201020132015hawks (talk) 02:11, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , hopefully merged onto 2019–20_novel_coronavirus_outbreak, we will see how this discussion goes. xinbenlv  Talk, Remember to "ping" me 02:17, 11 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Immediately restore the redirect. It is not appropriate to fork like this. Deleting the original page would hide the page history. If you want a new name, use the normal move procedures. --99of9 (talk) 02:18, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Respectively disagree, I am arguing a fork. The previous redirect happen to occupy the forked destination, and the nature of forking require it occupy what was previously a redirect. In the example of SUBPOV. If "Creationism" is forked from "Evolutionism" or vise-versa, when forking it will have to include the step of overtaking one of the redirect links. xinbenlv  Talk, Remember to "ping" me 02:23, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * If you are arguing for a fork, what is the nature of the alternate POV you advocate covering? --99of9 (talk) 02:26, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, if you want a fork, why are you requesting deletion of the original? Even if you have a good POV option (which I'm yet to hear), the deletion request should only be about that, not about the original page. --99of9 (talk) 02:28, 11 February 2020 (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.