Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swedish Academy 2018 controversies

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. Killiondude (talk) 06:15, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish Academy 2018 controversies

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

Text just a copied section from Swedish Academy plus a dubious tabloid-like sentence added. The issue is covered in the original article, no need for a separate article. cart-Talk 01:51, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Chimneyrock (talk) 02:40, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 06:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, WP:TOOSOON, so let's see how this plays out and how important it will be in perspective compared to other controversies in connection to the Academy. In the more than 200 years it has existed there have been other controversies (sv:Svenska Akademien#Kontroverser inom Svenska Akademien) and a separate article for this seems like recentism. Sjö (talk) 07:14, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Do we have in Wikipedia all the articles this ship can carry? No, we don't. Does this mean that we too, each one of us, can be the proud parents of smiling newborn article? No, it doesn't. So what do we do with such brazen attempts at parenthood? I say, if they are posted, kill 'em. -The Gnome (talk) 08:51, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Sjö. This belongs (at reasonable length) in the main article, not in a separate one. Potentially a separate article could be created later, but we still don't know what this leads to, exactly what's happened within the Acadamy's meetings and so on. /Julle (talk) 11:51, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Sjö and Julle. Too soon, not news, etc. It's easy to feel that what happens right now is obviously going to be of lasting importance, but it very rarely is. (OK, I do think that it will have some lasting importance, but not necessarily standalone article importance.) --bonadea contributions talk 14:38, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: walked by from zhwiki and saw the AfD tag. I mean, this is a particular scandal, right? Although small, this scandal has caused 2018 Nobel Prize in Literature delayed to 2019; I would think this is of enough importance. -- SzMithrandir ❈ Ered Luin ❈ 04:27, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unnecessary WP:SPLITOUT from Swedish Academy that currently is only 6315 B (1066 words) "readable prose size". The split from Special:Diff/839687855/839690025 to Special:PermaLink/839683624 does not follow WP:CORRECTSPLIT and thus violates WP:CWW. Sam Sailor 16:45, 9 May 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.