Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shuping Yang commencement speech controversy


 * 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. Consensus to keep. (non-admin closure) Exemplo347 (talk) 13:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Shuping Yang commencement speech controversy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NOTNEWS. This is simply a commencement speech in the US that was criticized by Chinese state media. No sustained coverage or significance. f e  minist  12:49, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, this is merely a translation of the article ,moreover, the event has caused thorough discussion among the world over the issue of the extended censorship. Deletion of this article will serious lyrics weakening the international effort of standing against the dictatorship in China User:真相永不落
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  f  e  minist  12:50, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions.  f  e  minist  12:50, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  21:10, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  21:11, 26 May 2017 (UTC)


 * delete. Yes, it was widely reported at the time but WP is not a news organisation charged with recording every headline and news item. A few months from now this will be forgotten, and as such it has no long-term notability, either as an event or an individual.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 22:43, 26 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I can see the point of deleting it, for the reason it's not notable for an encyclopedia. The larger point seems to be the influence of the CSSA imposing Chinese state-run air quality "standards" and general authoritarian influence into the American discourse.  A commencement speech at an American university is not the place to smog facts, comparing only Chinese cities and ignore higher standards outside China, only for the sake of avoiding ruffling princeling feathers.  DavidBoudreau (talk) 09:11, 27 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Fueled by Global Times and CSSA, this speech has caused widespread controversy in China. --DukeAnt (talk) 03:30, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * This event has extremely high notability in China, reported as "Shuping Yang Humiliation-of-China Speech" (杨舒平辱华演讲) in most Chinese media, but I wonder what the notability is in the whole world. In my opinion, it is just simply showing the over nationalism, xenophobia and siege mentality among the Chinese mob. Some popular Chinese proverbs such as 家丑不可外扬 (domestic scandals should not be known by others) just simply shows Chinese-style xenophobia. Some popular Chinese proverbs such as 狗不嫌家贫，子不嫌母丑 (dog never despises the poverty of its master, and son never despises the ugliness of his mother) only shows the Chinese-style slavery-deserving mentality. --Yejianfei (talk) 04:06, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.    </li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Shuping Yang commencement speech controversy to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 04:47, 30 May 2017 (UTC)</li></ul>
 * The subject clearly passes Notability (events). Numerous sources from several countries have covered the subject. The Australian Financial Review and Special Broadcasting Service are from Australia. Global Times and People's Daily are from China. Asia Times, Hong Kong Economic Journal, Hong Kong Free Press, and South China Morning Post are from Hong Kong. Lianhe Zaobao is from Singapore. BBC, The Guardian, The Tab, and The Times are from the United Kingdom. China Digital Times, Duowei News, Epoch Times, The Huffington Post, NBC News, New Tang Dynasty Television, New York Daily News, The New York Times, NPR, Quartz, Radio Free Asia, Voice of America, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and The Washington Times are from the United States. Cunard (talk) 04:47, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The coverage is ongoing. The commencement speech was delivered 21 May 2017, which is over a week before the most recent articles about it. See the 27 May 2017 article in Duowei News, the 28 May 2017 articles in Epoch Times and New Tang Dynasty Television, and the 29 May 2017 article in Radio Free Asia. Cunard (talk) 04:47, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep per significant news coverage of this controversy. If the nominator's rationale is that "in a few months time [sic] this will be over" then they should come back a few months later and argue per WP:NOTNEWS that the event has not had enduring relevance. But until discussion of this controversy stops, their nomination rationale is invalid. Deryck C. 15:17, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * New coverage is still being generated as of now, two weeks after the original speech went explosive. --Deryck C. 18:46, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep has garnered RS--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 01:25, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   07:55, 3 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Commencement speeches aren't notable, and no amount of propaganda/entertainment coverage will make the controversy notable. Power~enwiki (talk) 03:53, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The concept of Notability does not preclude any topic category from being notable. Deryck C. 18:49, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:24, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:24, 8 June 2017 (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.