Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secession in Russia (2nd nomination)

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 remove WP:CRYSTALBALL material and original research. No consensus for a rename. No consensus for a specific maintenance/cleanup tag to note that the article contains original research and/or crystal ball material. (non-admin closure) wumbolo ^^^ 15:38, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Secession in Russia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wikipedia does what-if articles now? Alexis Jazz (talk) 22:14, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:52, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:30, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:30, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – Entirely crystal ball-ish article, with the little info it presents being mostly synthesis material. Only four sources are used (all of them in Russian), and the various statements they seem to reference are seemingly forcibly put together in the article to try to imply that this is an event which is more relevant and likely to happen than it actually is. Not notable as per WP:NEVENTS either. Impru20^talk 17:20, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I considered AFD-ing this article when it was created, but instead moved it to its current title (from the more-CRYSTAL "Dissolution of Russia"). I think an article similar to Partition and secession in California could be written on the topic (beyond simply repeating content about the Dissolution of the Soviet Union), but I don't have sources; the existing article may have enough POV/SYNTH issues to justify deletion. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:56, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Probably keep as the topic of seccession is notable. The treatment is almost entirely CRYSTAL and there is very little salvageable, but I'm generally not a fan of the WP:TNT argument. Wikidata leads to ru:Распад России ("Breakup of Russia"), which is obviously the source of the what-if scenarios -- a much better article could be written on the basis of ru:Сепаратизм в России ("Separatism in Russia"), which doesn't have an en.wp interwiki link. Hopefully a Russian speaker will step in and get it done. Daß Wölf 02:56, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, but perhaps rename to Dissolution of Russia. This is notable concept; passes GNG. There is nothing wrong with futurology subjects. Page exists on three other languages. My very best wishes (talk) 04:41, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. According to WP:Crystal, Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation or presumptions.. Not only this subject is perfectly verifiable (can be sourced to multiple RS), but it is also not a speculation/presumption, but a scientific hypothesis. My very best wishes (talk) 15:24, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Notable and verifiable. ^Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 16:22, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: OR and WP:CRYSTALBALL. I was not able to find sufficient reliable sources that discuss the hypothetical dissolution. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:15, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The sources are largely scholarly and ref [1], which is directly on this subject, has a section "Review of recent literature" (google translate) which shows that there is a body of scholarly literature on this. Those participants who have failed to find sources in Engish should read WP:NOENG. SpinningSpark 00:40, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Spinningspark's and L3X1's arguments. --Ⴂ. ႡႠႪႠႾႠႻႤ★ 19:53, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Mine's more a statement of what I perceive to be facts than an argument, though. ^Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 00:22, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Ok, I've corrected. --Ⴂ. ႡႠႪႠႾႠႻႤ★ 11:47, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep due to passing WP:V and WP:GNG overall – but remove anything that is WP:OR, unsourced, or WP:CRYSTAL. Redditaddict69 09:51, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep notable topic, meets GNG. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 12:30, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.