Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tradenation luxury goods scam


 * 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 delete. Star  Mississippi  01:25, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Tradenation luxury goods scam

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:NOTNEWS and the like. Just another run-of-the-mill instance of greed & foolishness that has little encyclopedic value but is top-shelf tabloid fodder. The way the article is currently written may be in violation of WP:BLP too. Kingoflettuce (talk) 16:22, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * p.s. Copvyio! Kingoflettuce (talk) 16:23, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Singapore. Shellwood (talk) 17:11, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree that this reads like a news article, and a tabloid one at that. People aren't even convicted yet, just accused. I'm not experienced enough to be sure, but it might indeed also violate WP:BLP. --LordPeterII (talk) 18:07, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a run-of-the-mill crime and nobody has been convicted. LordPeterII is correct that this level of detail about the accused people and their family violates BLP policy. Cullen328 (talk) 19:03, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing about news coverage suggests anything out of the ordinary with this sort of e-commerce scam. No sort of lasting effect apparent - not helped by the fact that it's an ongoing case and no one's even received a conviction yet. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 12:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. I feel that we should not delete it, but just to amend and rewrite the article into a more appropriate style since there are issues about the language and writing. The coverage and magnitude of the crime seems to be more than ordinary given the huge sum of money cheated and the fugitives' decision to flee, which lasted for weeks before they got caught. --NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 04:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I see you are active in the area, if not on this article itself. I'm mostly concerned about the WP:BLP implications now, and because yeah we are WP:NOTNEWS. The list List_of_major_crimes_in_Singapore_(2000–present) does look a bit strange (as does List_of_major_crimes_in_Singapore_(before_2000)). If you compare that to Wikipedia's coverage for other countries, we have only the most extreme crimes for France, and mostly crimes related to the Mafia for Italy. None list e.g. any of the victims of rapes, or a significant amount of "regular" crimes which don't have their own article. Please evaulate whether this really is adhering to our standards – I think these list articles might need to be condensed down immmensely, just like this article needs to be deleted. --LordPeterII (talk) 10:56, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Ditto the drug trafficker articles, although the consensus for those seems to be going the other way. Anyhow, Nelson is obviously very competent in researching and churning out massive articles, but I completely share LordPeter's concerns. Kingoflettuce (talk) 22:31, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep 132.147.119.112 (talk) 17:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @IP editor can you please give a reasoning? You're not expected to vote "Keep" without giving a reasoning, afaik. --LordPeterII (talk) 20:07, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.