Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Maida 51 case (2nd nomination)

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 redirect to November 2016 Jakarta protests. Any content worth merging is still available from the history. Randykitty (talk) 12:59, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Al Maida 51 case

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Al Maida 51 case (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)

Unneutral POV by creator which is still original from him. Redundant since it is related to November 2016 Jakarta protests. Flix11 (talk) 07:06, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user is not open minded for the second time since he using the same reason for AfD report as the previous one which rejected. Thus, should the report be proceeded with weak arguments of "dislike opinion of POV" that superseded by the limitation of official rules of Wikipedia concerning article deletion policy? Qzxv5 (talk) 10:08, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:55, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:07, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:07, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:07, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:07, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • To User:Flix11, Do not file an improper report here When you complained about NPOV of an article, Wikipedia has NPOV Noticeboard for appropriate place for NPOV discussion followed with adequate discourse on the article's talk page. So your report on Articles for deletion is not suitable here. The content of my edits rely on POV of properly reliable sources, not POV of mine:

WP:NPOV
: All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.

Also read Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/FAQ#Lack_of_neutrality_as_an_excuse_to_delete and This discussion carefully and rethinking your decision when complaining here. Qzxv5 (talk) 14:02, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
...which now extends to haranguing the Checkusers Bbb23, & ST47. Cabayi (talk) 14:43, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: unrelated, I did not even know if that light request is considered harassing. What you should know with cool head that this user is already made several completely bias pro-
    Muhammad Rizieq Shihab view such as in Indonesia–Saudi Arabia relations (1, 2). Rizieq's foul-mouth might not known outside Indonesia but he is known here in Indonesia to have called for non-Muslim persecutions. Flix11 (talk) 16:29, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Response I think you should keep your words civil and
do not attack other user personally by labeling or you must be banned from Wikipedia. Besides, I included the Indonesia–Saudi Arabia relations because of my content edit depended by various Indonesian news portals and other reliable sources and not my personal bias, actually. Think objectively, not subjectively nor attacking personal. Qzxv5 (talk) 10:08, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
No merge nor redirect I don't think it is 'Extensive duplication of content' or redundancy because I also included various events or cases related to it, such as December_2016_Jakarta_protests, Ahmad Dhani case, response from Ma'ruf Amin and Interior Minister, result of court, etc. that are not covered in November 2016 Jakarta protests. Moreover, November 2016 Jakarta protests is only about one of several protests while Al-Maida 51 case is separate event focused on the long criminal case process with aftermath and the a lot of events surrounding it. Qzxv5 (talk) 10:08, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect to
    T
    04:13, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment, if merged then a new title will be needed. November 2016 Jakarta protests does not adequately encompass all the events from the Sept 2016 speech through to the end of the trial in May 2017. Cabayi (talk) 12:57, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Articles on events can have content on their aftermath or extended effects without needing a title that specifies that.
      T
      04:50, 21 December 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Al_Maida_51_case_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1090655435"