Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Violence against women in Ukraine


 * 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 snow keep. (non-admin closure) gidonb (talk) 18:00, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Violence against women in Ukraine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The problem is definitely exaggerated. One third of all women in the world suffer violence against them. In WHO report for a selection of European countries (including Ukraine) this percentage makes up 25% (1/4 only). Per this Ukrainian study it's even lower - 22% of women aged 15-49 experience some type of physical violence or sexual violence. See also this article on gender equality in Ukraine. Since 2017 domestic violence is criminalized. So generally, the topic of this article is made out of thin air Piramidion 09:04, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. First of all, this article talks about violence against women in Ukraine, which exists. Saying that it's not a big problem is not an argument, as that violence exists nonetheless. Second of all, even if it is "just" 25%, that is still a huge lot – this is obviously an opinion, just like yours. Perhaps the article itself needs some improvement, but that does not mean it should be deleted, because it discusses an issue that exists, regardless of its size. Moreover it does look like certain UN agencies have raised this issue and talked about this topic, which in my opinion proves that this topic deserves its own article. BeŻet (talk) 09:16, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * This would mean that there should be an article with this exact name scheme for every other country, including Poland. Do you want me to create one? Because as I said - the problem is exaggerated. Because what about violence against men? Because if this kind of an article should exist, it should be centered on domestic violence, not just violence against women. Or another article named "Violence against men in Ukraine" should be created as well, because why not? Such a thing does exist as well. Otherwise this is not an encyclopedic approach. --Piramidion 09:37, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Feel free to create articles for other countries. Is violence against men in Ukraine at similar levels to that of women? If so, create one too, but I'm pretty sure that, like in other countries, violence against women is a lot bigger problem than violence against men. BeŻet (talk) 10:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, you're being inconsistent here: "Saying that it's not a big problem is not an argument, as that violence exists nonetheless." - these are your words.--Piramidion 10:30, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not being inconsistent. Violence against men exists in Ukraine, and everywhere else. What I'm saying is that if we talk about violence against women in Ukraine, that does not mean we automatically have to create articles for every single country and also about violence against men. BeŻet (talk) 10:46, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not talking about "having to create", I talk about that we "should be able to create", that is, those articles shouldn't get deleted per some kind of notability guidelines, because "More than 40% of domestic violence victims are male", or "The 1975 National Family Violence Survey (Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family, Straus et al.) found men and women equally abusive", or "A total of 215,273 homicides were studied, 77% of which involved male victims and 23% female victims", or the WHO report Injury and violence kill more men than women (and that makes up the inconsistency). If this percentage of women suffering violence in Ukraine is enough for an article, then it should be enough for other countries as well. Am I correct? Or do I misunderstand something? If the final decision of this discussion would be "keep", it should mean that it can be used as a precedent for creating other similar articles.--Piramidion 12:43, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Your main argument was that the problem is exaggerated. Your sources include statistics regarding United Kingdom, not Ukraine. Regardless, in this particular case, the topic of violence against women in Ukraine has been raised on multiple occasions on multiple levels, including national and international. Women are still on average twice as likely to be be victims of domestic abuse around the world. We can create additional articles about violence against men in a specific country if there are strong reasons for that, e.g. the problem is widely discussed and has an impact. Not to cater for some men's fragile egos. BeŻet (talk) 13:26, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok, I think I got your point. If the topic is discussed widely and has drawn some public attention (violence against women did, violence against men did not), then it deserves an article in Wikipedia. If not - it doesn't. Am I correct? And yes, the sources were random, because I did not talk about Ukraine only. If we talk about Ukraine, 30% of calls about domestic violence had been made by men but that doesn't really matter for Wikipedia, if I got you right.--Piramidion 13:49, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Well according to your own stats, women are over twice as likely to call the hotline, which makes it more notable. This situation is not symmetrical, therefore it isn't equally important to create an article regarding violence against men in Ukraine. BeŻet (talk) 13:56, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  —AE  ( talk  •  contributions ) 09:38, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  —AE  ( talk  •  contributions ) 09:38, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions.  —AE  ( talk  •  contributions ) 09:38, 11 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Snow keep. The dismissiveness and whataboutism on display above is shameful and irrelevant. This is clearly a notable topic; there are several good sources already cited in the article, and finding dozens more is trivial . –&#8239;Joe (talk) 10:41, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh really? Discussing the possibility of creating articles in an encyclopedia on adjacent topics and on the same topic for other countries is "shameful and irrelevant"? Or you just chose not to notice my conclusion "otherwise this is not an encyclopedic approach"? Or perhaps you call my suggestions to create other articles a "whataboutism"? Or what was that comment of yours?--Piramidion 12:26, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * See WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST. Saying that violence against Ukrainian women is "definitely exaggerated" and not of encyclopaedic significance because "only" a quarter of them suffer it is shameful. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 13:29, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I knew it! I knew, that "only" will draw attention of some moralists ("only 1/4" compared to "1/3" in the world - that was the context of that word, but no, your moral standards don't let you understand that). No, this is encyclopedia, and I don't really care about what you perceive as "shameful" here. Or is there any kind of censorship that prevents from providing these numbers? Oh, btw, about "exaggeration", take a look at these charts and this table and compare the data for Ukraine to the data for other countries. --<tt style="color:#057021;font-family:Sans Serif">Piramidion</tt> 13:49, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Besides, you're citing wrong policy, as my primary arguments had nothing to do with this kind of stuff.--<tt style="color:#057021;font-family:Sans Serif">Piramidion</tt> 13:52, 11 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, Existing sources clearly satisfy general notability. Any NPOV issues can be addressed by editing. I see no discussion of NPOV at the article talk page or in the edit history. Gab4gab (talk) 14:15, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll try to address this if the decision would be "keep". --<tt style="color:#057021;font-family:Sans Serif">Piramidion</tt> 14:53, 11 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Sources in the article and provided above are more than sufficient to establish notability. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:11, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Easily passes GNG. Even if it's true that violence against women in Ukraine is less severe than in other places, that's still a topic worthy of an article. – <b style="color:SlateBlue">FenixFeather</b> (talk) (Contribs) 20:15, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm not sure why such article gets nominated for AfD, but sources given should be enough to keep under WP:GNG. If there are errors, then change it, rather than nominating it for deletion. I also think the first sentence needs to be rewritten (the body of text mentions alcohol, so which is it?). Hzh (talk) 11:54, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Generally "class of crime in country Y" is notable (as usually criminology studies in the particular country as well as news reports in the particular country will address the topic within the country) - and this seems to be no exception. The article itself could be improved, but it is sourced and it seems there are more sources available. There might be an argument to be had regarding a merge (not sure to what), but definitely not deletion.Icewhiz (talk) 12:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:33, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - Per references. This goes for WP:GNGBabbaQ (talk) 15:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:52, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep as clearly notable as debated above. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:25, 15 September 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.