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. It's hard to close this way because of the result of the !voting, but unfortunately, the concerns raised in the summary of the previous AFD on this subject have still not been addressed by the keep !voters. Recall the previous summary, which objected that the "keep !voters have not pointed to substantial evidence of the enduring notability and significance of the visit, of which WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT both speak. Such evidence would have been necessary to stand in the way of the widespread support...for deletion at this AfD on the basis that this was a routine state visit without enduring significance." Keep !voters in this second AFD seem to be arguing not that those objections have been addressed with this re-creation, but that those concerns are unimportant. Since that was the result of the previous (and much larger) discussion, the results of the previous AFD weigh here as well. Therefore, I am forced to close the AFD as delete. I would like to reiterate that if evidence emerges in the future of lasting significance of the event, per the relevant policies, then (and only then) this discussion would not constrain recreation of the article. causa sui (talk) 17:34, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Barack Obama visit to India

2010 Barack Obama visit to India (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nominating this article on the same subject as one previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barack Obama's visit to India Nominating with the same reason as before :

Heads of state make state visits. That's what they do when they aren't in their own county. Wikipedia is not a news source, and this trip has no implications in significant changes in international relations, law, etc. Mtking (talk) 12:24, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Disclaimer--I'm the author of hte article. As stated in the article's lead, during hte trip Obama addressed a joint session of the Indian Parliament, which I believe is the 4th time that's happened since 2000. He publicly endorsed India to be a permanent member of the UN Security Council. WP:NOTNEWS does not apply, as this is not 'routine'. But beyond that, I'll go straight to the meat of the reason--I can'f possibly see how someone could say 2011 royal tour of Canada (currently on it's way to an overwhelming consensus to keep) is worth an article adn this isn't. I'm not normally a fan of this kind of argument; I myself supported the deletion of the Royal tour of Canada but opposed referring to the deletion of Barack Obama's visit to India as an argument. However, I the difference in notability between the two events is very stark in my eyes. Also, in the deletion discussion of the royal tour, several editors expressed support of an article on Obama's visit to India. Thus, I think it's possible that consensus has changed.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:43, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 16:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 16:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 16:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. As said heads of states keep making visits to other countries on talks of their bilateral ties. Each visit of head is clearly not notable and fails WP:EVENT. —  Abhishek  Talk 17:45, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you saying all visits by heads of states are not notable enough? Including this and this? Regarding WP:EVENT, as the article states Obama's visit marked a shift in US policy on its relations towards India, an enduring effect. It also received in depth coverage and the trip affected a large geographic geograpic scope. I fail to see how it fails WP:EVENT.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment--based on the experience of the last deletion discussion, I'm foreseeing some opposes on the basis that 'foreign heads of state make visits all the time'. We could just as easily say 'football teams play each other all the time' and thus eliminate all articles on football matches. We could apply the same logic to virtually every article in the encyclopedia.
However basic question is, why not have articles on state visits? True, there are very few in WP so far. But notable visits by foreign leaders are a very important part of nations building their relationships. Yes, often they're primarily symbolic but symbolism and photo-ops matter. Of course, not every foreign visit by a head of state of all ~200 UN member counties is notable enough. So we have to draw the line somewhere. Where to draw the line is a matter for the WP community to discuss, but I think a good case can me made for allowing more such articles. This year we have articles on Queen Elizabeth II's visit to the Republic of Ireland and the 2011 royal tour of Canada (which isn't even a visit by a head of state). Surely Obama's visit to India is more notable than the latter, if not similar to the former?--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The article definitely meets WP:EVENT. The deal made during the trip is expected to produce a large number of jobs, thus a lasting effect. The sources used give coverage from multiple respected news organizations, both local and international. The event has a significant impact on both nations. I cannot find anything in WP:EVENT that this article fails.--GuidingArrow (talk) 22:02, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Notified the closing admins of the last Afd: Mkativerata and HJ Mitchell. Nightw 03:28, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly I was influenced by the 2011 royal tour of Canada article but I don't think you can possibly argue that Obama's visit to India is less notable than that. So what are we doing here, setting a higher bar for Obama than members of the Royal family? In any event, the article is well sourced and clearly meets WP:EVENT as I explained above. NOTNEWS is clearly not relevant here, which is meant for 'routine reporting of announcements, sports, or celebrities'--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) No I can't. I already argued on the contrary in that article's deletion discussion. Neither are notable. Neither should be kept. Unfortunately, as you say, consensus is showing a double standard. Perhaps it's because Kate is a lot prettier than Obama? Whatever the reason, we shouldn't go creating or re-creating articles on other events of dubious notability just because that one gets to stay. Neither it is acceptable to unilaterally overturn a prior consensus regarding an article's deletion. Nightw 04:56, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:CSD#G4 specifically excludes articles not substantially identical to the deleted version; this article was made from scratch; thus it is not relevant here.--Johnsemlak (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The nomination is a bit flippant: "Heads of state make state visits. That's what they do when they aren't in their own county." And historians and social scientiests study the interactions between states such as this one. The Queen going hither and yon is a strictly ceremonial event; a head of state implies the interjection of state policy. This is not a six hour visit to Bermuda, this is a state visit to the world's largest democracy. This article is well done and richly sourced. You wanna known the whens and the wheres of the state visit on the fly — check the encyclopedia and there it is. Why the hell would anybody want to change that? An ill-considered nomination... Carrite (talk) 06:05, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. – Lionel (talk) 07:55, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    This argument is invalid per arguments to avoid. Can you explain how it fails? As I said above, the article states Obama's visit marked a shift in US policy on its relations towards India, an enduring effect. It also received in depth coverage and the trip affected a large geographic geograpic scope. I fail to see how it fails WP:EVENT. WP:NOTNEWS is clearly not relevant here, which is meant for 'routine reporting of announcements, sports, or celebrities'. Obama addressed the Indian Parliament in a joint session, a privilege not usually given visiting heads of state; he publicly endorsed India to become a permanent member of the UNSC; the trip marked a shift in US policy towards India. He was accompanied in India by 34 warships. This is hardly routine.--Johnsemlak (talk) 08:11, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails NOTNEWS: state visits are routine news events. We can't possible have an article for every state visit of every president. Fails WP:EVENT: Obama supporting India as a permanent UN member is a woefully inadequate rationale around which to build an article. – Lionel (talk) 00:38, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not all state visits are routine news events. We have articles on the 2011 royal tour of Canada (a visit by the grandchild of head of state) and Queen Elizabeth II's visit to the Republic of Ireland. Some state visits are not routine. And you haven't come close to explaining how this fails WP:EVENT. It meets WP:INDEPTH, WP:EFFECT, WP:GEOSCOPE. Obama not only announced support for India to become a permanent member of the UNSC, the trip marked a shift in US policy to India--a clear WP:EFFECT, certainly on par wiht the other two state visits I mentioned.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:36, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete (and salt/trout as needed). To say "it will create jobs" is WP:CRYSTAL. To compare it to the very first state visit (which meets WP:N) by a new royal couple is not valid. Visits by a head of state are typically non-notable. Formal changes in policy/attitude towards a country are not apparent. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:22, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Formal changes in policy/attitude towards a country are not apparent.-- US confirms strategic shift towards India (BBC).
    • To say "it will create jobs" is WP:CRYSTAL-- There are ample reliable sources documenting the jobs affected.
    • To compare it to the very first state visit (which meets WP:N) by a new royal couple is not valid-- I don't know what to say there. We allow a royal couple who are the grandchildren of the current monarch to have an article for their vacation in Canada, but Obama visits the 2nd largest country, addresses its parliament in a joint session, makes a shift in policy towards that country, and that's considered less notable? I CAN'T BELIEVE someone's seriously arguing that;
    • (which meets WP:N)-- How does this article not meet WP:N?--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:40, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You made your argument once, that's enough - you don't need to counter everyone else's with the same argument. Trying to shoot down policy-based discussions with attempts to use policy on your own behalf really looks more like you're begging. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:29, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for mentioning this. I think the Gandhi/MLK/Obama links are quite significant actually, as they provide evidence of the influence the men had on each other.--Johnsemlak (talk) 08:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On each other? --rgpk (comment) 01:41, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think he meant influence Gandhi had on MLK and Obama. Gandhi himself was influenced by American Henry David Thoreau and his ideas on Civil Disobedience (Thoreau)--Wikireader41 (talk) 16:24, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Delete as WP:NOTNEWS. If, at some future date, reliable sources find this to be a significant visit, the article can always be created. As of now, there doesn't seem to be any significance attached to the visit (except in a WP:OR sort of way). --rgpk (comment) 01:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Changing to keep. While I think it is early to know whether or not the visit has lasting significance, on reflection, I don't see why we shouldn't have an article on an event of this sort. At the least, it is a handy reference (the purpose of an encyclopedia) and these visits are not that frequent. --rgpk (comment) 23:09, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep A visit that was called called "Historic" by RS [1], especially since it featured a rare address to the Joint session of Indian Parliament by a foreign dignitary ( only the 2nd US prez to do this, Bush was denied this as was David Cameron).[2][3]. Major Policy Changes by US ( support for India at UNSC for first time) in hopes of countering an "assertive China" according to NYT.[4]. Both Obama and PM Manmohan Singh described this as a "Historic milestone" in Indo-US relations. "Prime Minister Singh and President Obama concluded that their meeting is a historic milestone as they seek to elevate the India-U.S. strategic partnership to a new level for the benefit of their nations and the entire mankind".[5]--Wikireader41 (talk) 16:13, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
also the "biggest" foreign visit EVER by a US President. "The entourage will be the biggest ever in terms of logistics and manpower for any US president."[6],[7]--Wikireader41 (talk) 18:34, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Being called historic ONE day after the visit ends does not demonstrate "the enduring notability" of the visit. Mtking (talk) 22:01, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
says who ??? is it your own Idea or some RS say that also. You mean Obama's and Singh's comments count for nothing. They recognized it as historic on account of a permanent and enduring change in US policy towards India ( support of UNSC). Remember during cold war US and India were on opposite sides. The intention was to counter China as per NYT. IMO what we saw was a post cold war rearrangement of strategic alliances with US aiming to encircle & isolate a rising China by strengthening relations with countries surrounding it. I cant think of any other foreign policy initiative by Obama administration which even comes anywhere close to this.--Wikireader41 (talk) 22:39, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The enduring notability is very well established here. A change (even if it seems small) in the relations of US and India will affect both countries and others for years to come. It certainly qualifies far more a Royal tour of Canada and many other events routinely accepted as WP articles.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:21, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Yet another reason is the fact that the president stayed at the Taj hotel in Mumbai, the scene of the terrorist attack by Islamic militants. This is not conventional. Over there he said "We will never forget," and that the US were united against terrorism. This is just one more item from a long list of unique events from this visit and that's why we need this article. Zuggernaut (talk) 04:57, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:TRIVIA. Nightw 06:19, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:TRIVIA strengthens the case for keeping the article. It says:
A number of articles contain lists of isolated information, which are often grouped into their own section, labeled "Trivia", "Notes" (not to be confused with "Notes" sections which store footnotes), "Facts", "Miscellanea", "Other information", etc. This style guideline deals with the way in which these facts are represented in an article, not with whether the information contained within them is actually trivia, or whether trivia belongs in Wikipedia.
This guideline does not suggest removing trivia sections, or moving them to the talk page. If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all.
Inclusion of a section on the terrorists David Headley and Tahawwur Hussain Rana fits well with the narrative of the progress made as a result of this visit. A subset of the 74 sources from David Headley can be reused and there will be many more out there in libraries and newspaper archives. Zuggernaut (talk) 07:00, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
well Night w you might want to read WP:EFFECT. this visit has documented and well sourced permanent effects.--Wikireader41 (talk) 14:34, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The article is an almost-stub and the only reason that it's not a stub is because it contains a lot of trivial information (attempts at demonstrating notability). In order for the article to be anything more than an almost-stub, editors would have to add a whole lot more of this or (as many seem to be doing above) add speculations about what its affects were or could have been. That he stayed at a hotel where there was previously a territorist attack, that he visited some temple or shrine, etc. are not examples of lasting significance. It seems that the information that *is* of significance is already in another article. Rennell435 (talk) 13:55, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the article is not expanded enough at this time. that in itself is not a reason to delete. we can all work on improving it. I would like to see the details of all the agreements that were signed during the visit ( in encyclopedic detail) so that 10 years from now I want to check which ones came to fruition and which ones did not I have a handy article to go to.--Wikireader41 (talk) 14:34, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a list of agreements signed during the visit:
  • The first agreement they have signed is of providing clean energy to India. Both are agreed to set up a center of R& D for clean energy.
  • US will also provide $5 million annually for five years to complete the joint research on bio-fuels, solar energy, and energy efficiency.
  • US signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with India to set up a Global Centre for Nuclear Energy Partnership for research and development of secure and proliferation resistant reactor systems.
  • MOU to establish an India-US Energy Cooperation Programme. It will mobilise private sector expertise and resources to address clean energy-related issues in India and the US. This will broadly cover all sources of energy, including renewable source, and ties in with Obama’s focus on climate change.
  • Agreement on technical cooperation to study India’s annual monsoon rains. The agreement is likely to help India improve its capability in predicting monsoon, which is crucial for the agriculture sector, crop weather prediction and predicting floods.
  • MOU between India and the US on shale gas resources which will see US technology used to assess shale gas resources in India. India does not have technology to exploit shale gas, an unconventional gas trapped in sedimentary rocks and the US is a pioneer in the field.
  • India and the US signed MOU on establishing and operating a Global Disease Detection Centre in India. The MoU would be implemented through an agreed plan between the National Centre for Disease Control, India and the Centre for Disease Control, Atlanta. The agreement would enable sharing best practices for detection and response to emerging infections.
Zuggernaut (talk) 14:42, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If the article explored these treaties, rather than what temples he visited and what hotels he stayed at, it'd be a different story. Right now the article doesn't substantially demonstrate why the visit was notable. Rennell435 (talk) 18:17, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
but that can be fixed. will you please reconsider your !vote since you seem to now think that there is potential for expansion. we will get the above mentioned info included. here are some references which go over some of the deals made.[8],[9], [10],[11]--Wikireader41 (talk) 18:58, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If it can be demonstrated that something came out of these deals, or better, that they had a lasting effect, then of course! Rennell435 (talk) 19:50, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
well that is not what you said above. Anyway looks like some progress is being made in setting Global Disease Detection Centre, New Delhi and a director has been named Kenneth Earhart (’83) Named Director of Global Disease Detection Center in India, [12]. --Wikireader41 (talk) 23:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, it is good to see real names and real persons against the jobs that are being created. Zuggernaut (talk) 03:32, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It was. I asked for "examples of lasting significance". Rennell435 (talk) 08:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The lasting significance criterion is meet with the point that teh visit resulted in a deepening of ties between the US and India (backed up by RSs like BBC which see a 'policy shift' as a result of the visit) which the US may potientially exploit to counter China's growing influence. It's not a seizmic shift in foreign relations a la 1972 Nixon visit to China bit it does represent a small push of India-US relations in a certain direction, which I think qualifies as a lasting influence given the geopolitical importance of the two countries. The event doesn't have to be 'historic' such as Martin Luther posting his 95 theses or Stanley meeting Livingstone; 'notable' is a much lower bar.--Johnsemlak (talk) 08:59, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You are right Rennell435 this visit did not lead to cure for cancer, world peace or eradication of HIV so it needs to be deleted. the magnitude of WP:EFFECT you are asking for simply does not exist for 99% of WP articles on WP:EVENTS. you could make exactly the same argument ( and people did) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011 royal tour of Canada. The consensus there was that such a high bar was not required and that visit satisfied all WP policies. Any comments on that.--Wikireader41 (talk) 15:32, 12 July 2011 (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.
Allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2010_Barack_Obama_visit_to_India
No tags for this post.