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. If anyone would like me to restore the article into their userspace to facilitate a selective merge to September 2016 North Korean nuclear test, please just ask. A Train^talk 07:45, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

International reactions to the September 2016 North Korean nuclear test

[edit]

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

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information; it is also not a quotefarm for "quotations [that] can be minimized in length by providing an appropriate context". An appropriate context is provided in the main article with a concise, encyclopedic summary. Hence, a merge is not necessary nor would it be particularly productive. There are actually several pages devoted to international reactions on individual N. Korean missle tests, each almost a carbon-copy structurally of this one. I would have listed them all here but I wanted to get the community's consensus on an individual article before making such a bold move. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with September 2016 North Korean nuclear test, international reactions are hardly mentioned on this page despite what you said and consensus is to mention the international reactions of both major countries and countries in the region of an event. Probably not all of the countries should be mentioned however, no country supported the strikes, everyone condemned them completely so therefore relatively minor countries who arn't in the region should be removed (i.e Italy, Turkey and Israel). AlessandroTiandelli333 (talk) 17:17, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From the main article: "The test, conducted in defiance of the international community, prompted wide international condemnation". Is that not the gist of what the quotes say? Some major reactions by nearby countries, international organizations, and the US were mentioned.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:29, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:41, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:41, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:47, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete with very selective merge to September 2016 North Korean nuclear test. The parent article isn't too long. Most of the reactions are repeated condemnations - we don't need a quote farm, we do perhaps need to list countries condemning or expand a bit more than what's there. China's response probably should be on the main article, and possibly Russia as well (as NK is a client state and neighbor, their response is a bit more nuanced - and of quite some significance).Icewhiz (talk) 05:29, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete with some merge to parent. A couple of reactions went beyond "representatives of X condemned the test", and they bear repeating. The rest is boilerplate which can be summarized in the usual sentence. Mangoe (talk) 20:50, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- an indiscriminate amount of information; fails WP:LISTN. I don't see a need for a merge; the reactions from Russia and China, for example, are boilerplate condemnations. What's already present in the article ("The test, conducted in defiance of the international community, prompted wide international condemnation") is sufficient. Or perhaps, the sentence can be modified as: "The test, conducted in defiance of the international community, prompted wide international condemnation, including by the country's neighbours, Russia and China". That's the extent of the merge that I'd recommend.K.e.coffman (talk) 00:44, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The general opinions can be summarized as prose and merged but listing all the individual statements is useless, unencyclopedic, indiscriminate, and unnecessary. Also delete International reactions to the January 2016 North Korean nuclear test, International reactions to the 2013 North Korean nuclear test, International reactions to the 2009 North Korean nuclear test, and International reactions to the 2006 North Korean nuclear test: We get it, everybody condemns NK, blah blah blah, no one gives a shit about the exact quotation every foreign minister repeats ad nauseum. Reywas92^Talk 19:39, 2 November 2017 (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.