Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Upsilon Sigma Phi leaks scandal


 * 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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:08, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Upsilon Sigma Phi leaks scandal

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This incident initially occurred Nov 20, 2018, and caused a minor scandal in the Philippines. There was a two-week flurry of outraged press coverage as everyone and their grandmother rushed to comment on the situation, and then - nothing. I searched Philippine news sites like Rappler, PhilStar, Inquirer.net, and ABS-CBN news and came up with basically nothing new since the initial incident. That tells me that there is no lasting effect to this scandal, and that it should not have its own standalone article.

As it stands, the article is half a tabulated list of nasty comments, which is inappropriate since we are not an indiscriminate collection of information. The other half is a list of reactions from people, including individual non-notable fraternity members. We do not exist as a repository for reactions to events.

Full disclosure: I tagged this for merge to Upsilon Sigma Phi in April, but the discussion didn't go anywhere. Having circled back to the article and realizing how limited the coverage really was, I've changed my opinion about the appropriateness of the merge. In my opinion, a significant merge would constitute undue weight relative to the degree of coverage the leaks received. I think the summary already present at the USP article is sufficient coverage without becoming overly focused on a single negative event.

Pinging and, who commented on the merge request, and , who did some work on the article during its creation in November. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:24, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Discrimination-related deletion discussions. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:24, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fraternities and sororities-related deletion discussions. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:24, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:24, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:24, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:24, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Keep. As per Wikipedia notability rules for events, although we may want to summarize the quoted statements, rather than quote them directly. The event has had lasting effects on and is part of a pattern of Fraternity behavior and politics in the Philippines; it's geographical impact is arguably large given that UP is the Philippines' National university, with members consistently occupying high government positions; there's clearly both depth of coverage and diversity of coverage based on coverage by interaksyon, abs cbn, the star and the inquirer. - Koakaulana (talk) 00:45, 2 September 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge (expand somewhat the entry in the parent article) I agree with the indiscriminate list, at most, descriptions of the type of comments in the newsmedia. If one of the sources consider them Misogynistic, list it that way. Given the level of converage at the time which was National, I think there is more information, if only the reaction from significantly notable Upsilonians which needs to be kept. By comparison, this generated considerably more coverage than the Theta Tau at Syracuse issue, but considerably less than the Trijicon bible quotes. (Also, I'm much happier to see this in this context than a SLA trying to completely delete the issue from Wikipedia.Naraht (talk) 16:06, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * delete or, possibly restore to my version,, and protect or instead of protection ban the user who restored my deletions from the article.  DGG ( talk ) 00:31, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. People in the Philippines can be very passionate, but they are quick to forgive and move on too. This incident had no lasting effect. Filipinos moved on. I think there was a "boys will boys" attitude towards this incident. In addition, the country is patriarchal and very Catholic so the misogny and anti-Muslim part of the controversy never got much long term traction. Wikipedia's Filipino values article indicates: "Women in the Philippines are expected to become caring and nurturing mothers for their own children. Female Filipinos are also expected to lend a hand in household work. They are even anticipated to offer assistance after being married. On the other hand, Filipino men are expected to assume the role of becoming the primary source of income and financial support of his family." In other words, traditional gender roles and a more patriarchal society exists in the Philippines and feminism is less influential than in the West. So the misogny part of the controversy didn't have enough passion about it to be a defining moment in Filipino history/culture. In addition, Wikipedia's article Filipino psychology article indicates: "Pakikisama and Pakikipagkapwa: Smooth Interpersonal Relationship, or SIR, as coined by Lynch (1961 and 1973). This attitude is primarily guided by conformity with the majority." In other words, there is more of a live and let live culture in the Philippines and less culture war like in the West.Knox490 (talk) 02:57, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * How does any of this related to whether the Wikipedia article should be kept or deleted?Naraht (talk) 13:31, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * How does any of this related to whether the Wikipedia article should be kept or deleted?Naraht (talk) 13:31, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 11:35, 8 September 2019 (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.