Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coronavirus party

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 no consensus. I recommend first discussing whether to merge this somewhere before renominating it for deletion. Sandstein 20:34, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coronavirus party

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

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

~~Propose redirect to Pox party.~~ jamacfarlane (talk) 00:53, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. jamacfarlane (talk) 00:53, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One source about a Coronavirus party in Kentucky where participants apparently thumbed their noses at the disease: however the article makes it seem like these parties are widespread...yet I cannot find RS to back up this claim - . The other source in the article is about careful party goers with masks ostensibly trying not to catch the virus. A search reveals no other Coronavirus parties. Perhaps WP:TOOSOON or never. It remains to be seen if Coronavirus parties will be WP:LASTING. For now the Kentucky party is WP:WIDESPREAD - and that not a reason to have an article. I am willing to change my !vote if other evidence is found. Lightburst (talk) 01:12, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep
1. another source—CNN
2. Things are moving rapidly. If NYC has, say, 25 000 cases (≈ 1/4 of US) and if +90% get better in 2 weeks, I see a number of Covid-19 parties sprouting up before too long. (There's an article about some professional advocating them, but didn't include it in the article as I felt WP:BEANS)
3. I suppose a possible good source for RS is the non-English media.
4. FWIW, the article (at the time of this post) isn't 72 hours old.
DMBFFF (talk) 04:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We don't keep articles based on WP:CRYSTAL Lightburst (talk) 20:01, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, and I should give the section you linked to a better read, but it doesn't seem to apply here. (Btw, according to worldometer, NYS now is over 4x that—113 704, US is 302 919 with 14 686 cases recovered.) DMBFFF (talk) 19:34, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: On reflection, I don't think pox party is a suitable place to redirect to. The purpose of a pox party is to deliberately expose children to a disease. Coronavirus parties are held for adults in an act of defiance against government-advised social distancing and lockdown. I would suggest merging the content into Socio-economic impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic and redirecting to the appropriate section there. jamacfarlane (talk) 05:45, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I could live with that, though the redirect might be turned back into an article in a few months—maybe even a DAB—once it's established as a defiance party, as it seems to be, or more of a pox party, or as I'm seeing, a celebration by future survivors. DMBFFF (talk) 06:29, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. One isolated incident that got a blip of media attention. These idiots' 19 minutes of fame are up. Pox party is something entirely different. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:52, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep please see the German article for additional material. All the best: Rich Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 11:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. If you like I am going to expand the article this weekend with additional information, also from NL and BE. Ziko (talk) 11:36, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly notable by the present sources. Plus no doubt there will be many more to come. (on a personal note, I'd probably attend one if there was one near me). The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 13:19, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm a little too old to take this lightly, even for selfish reasons. Expected mortality for my cohort and gender is about 1.5%, and I have a history of atypical pneumonia, asthma and am blood type A. Adding the possibility of killing someone else I know and care about, it would present an unacceptable risk. Even without those selfish reasons, the risk of taking vital health resources, spreading directly or indirectly to others (potentially many hundreds or thousands), setting a bad example, or using police resources to deal with the "party" would all be good reasons not to.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 23:24, 28 March 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Anyone that stupid should not be editing Wikipedia -- Nick (talk) 16:53, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I see no evidence in the [weak] sourcing that this is a clearly defined concept. We seem to have an article that's about any virus held during the pandemic which people are connecting to the pandemic (in the theme, in the advertising, in the range of motivations, etc.). It's a party to get coronavirus, in spite of coronavirus, themed after coronavirus, marketed by mentioning coronavirus, etc. Not a notable topic, and we have loads of other places where it could be mentioned if it were a well-defined subject per WP:NOPAGE. Would also support turning into a disambiguation page pointing to either ignorance or sociopathy.. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:20, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: At a glance, I note some of the sources in the German article seem to not distinguish properly between just a random party the cops had to shut down for public health reasons (or simply for public nuisance reasons) and a "Coronavirus party". Not every party in all this madness is a "Coronavirus party". Honestly, I don't think we have enough SIGCOV to meet GNG right now. CRYSTAL and NOTNEWS apply here. If it's notable, let's wait until it appears we have lasting impact. Kudos to the author for trying to stay on top of things, but it may not be time yet. Agreed that a redirect to Pox party isn't appropriate. Perhaps a redirect to one of the other Coronavirus articles, if not delete. Waggie (talk) 16:39, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, see for example this article - are they deliberately trying to infect each other, are they doing it as an act of defiance, or are they just ignorant/reckless as to the risks? jamacfarlane (talk) 16:45, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on personal gatherings or similar.--Pharos (talk) 17:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: That entire article is three sentences. We need to discourage these tiny offshoot articles. jamacfarlane (talk) 19:40, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – if these were intentional gatherings intended to spread herd immunity against the virus, a redirect to Pox party would be appropriate. But they're not – they're stupid and misguided acts of civil disobedience that put participants and thousands of others at risk. The few sources provided here don't lend themselves to covering this as a discrete topic, and as such this article fails GNG. – bradv🍁 17:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It reads like the latest Moral panic, an irresponsible and dangerous activity that young people do in despite what society tells them to do. Like video games and rainbow parties (part urban legend). It remains to be seen whether this is a phenomenon that is relevant a week from today. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:40, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why are people in a haste to delete articles about critical worldwide events? Come back and delete this in 2 months if the subject is truly not notable. But if thousands will turn out to die after attending such parties and then spreading, OP won't look good in his anal retentiveness. 2601:602:9200:1310:7479:E1A6:59F7:CB47 (talk) 18:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This reference addresses something called a "coronavirus party". Kentucky governor Andy Beshear has mentioned this phenomena. Bus stop (talk) 20:23, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I think news outlets are probably over-sensationalizing individual incidents, but it does appear that this is a counter-force to social distancing that deserves attention. There are enough reliable sources. — Toughpigs (talk) 23:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on sources in the article. If not kept, it could be merged and redirected into a new section under Pox party. TJMSmith (talk) 23:14, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Many of the "delete" comments read more as moral commentary than as comments upon the notability of coronavirus parties. In any event, here's a source about one of these parties from two months ago: 'Infect me daddy,' Queen's University student trustee resigns after attending coronavirus party. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. Tough. The term is used all around the world (Poland). But is it a notable term yet? I am worried this is right now just a WP:DICTDEF + examples of use. We are not Urban Dictionary. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I would like to see it kept I think. It might be actually helpful for craving current information readers.GizzyCatBella 🍁 08:00, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on personal gatherings (which was moved to user space but can/should be improved.) This article already talks about three different phenomena: people meeting before impending lockdown (and guilty as charged, I will not see my friends for months and perhaps never), people having parties/gatherings in defiance of rules about gatherings, and people intending to catch the virus. Those are all different. They would also be better served in an article about how the pandemic has impacted socialization in general. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 08:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it seems to be a thing now. NYPost has an article about corona potlucks. I actually hope i'm wrong and this eventually becomes too minor and gets deleted. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:20, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Corona parties in Germany were mentioned also in Czech newspapers ([1]), Slovak newspapers ([2]) etc. Also Polish newspapers use the term "Korona party" for some local events ([3]). Certainly it is a worldwide and specific phenomenon, although it is typical for some countries and in others it is a rare excess, but all the more publicized and condemned. --ŠJů (talk) 02:22, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to pox party; flu parties are already mentioned there so it's not a chickenpox-specific article. Buttons0603 (talk) 00:10, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Buttons0603, pox parties are for intentionally contracting a disease in order to gain immunity, primarily for diseases like chicken pox where getting it an early age results in reduced symptoms. This is something completely different. – bradv🍁 00:30, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We may not like it, but it's a phenomenon occuring often enough to be discussed in politics and media. The article already has enough sources to prove notability, but many more sources exist and could be added. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 15:18, 4 April 2020 (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.