Talk:Stop Galamsey Now Protest

Avoid Page Merger With Galamsey

● Keep: This page should be kept. Information documented on the page focuses on the ongoing protest to Stop Galamsey Now, but not Galamsey (i.e illegal mining activities), for best practices lets reconsider the merger and keep both pages as a stand alone because both pages give different documentation, thus one is a protest and the other is illegal mining.Jwale2 (talk) 04:48, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I completely disagree. As I stated elsewhere, this page documents a three-day protest with minimal consequences, so in my opinion, a separate page is not warranted. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 05:01, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Context is key here. Galamsey has different types. These protests are asking for the ceasure of illegal mining activities in forest reserves and along water bodies. This type of illegal mining is called Alluvial mining and the protest is calling for the revoking of a legislative instrument 2462 that grants licences for people to mine in forest reserves and along water bodies. These activities are the causes of several environmental hazards and water security threats and is very significant.

Other than that there are issues of human right abuse and an abuse of the judicial system for the wrongful arrest of protestors.

Saying that it is not notably because it is a three day protest is like saying 9-11 is also not notably because it only happened in a few hours or days. Heatrave (talk) 15:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

@Heatrave, your comparison of this tiny protest to the September 11 attacks is preposterous and obscene, and it severely diminishes your overall credibility on this and any other topic requiring a rational and impartial evaluation. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 16:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I take it back. That was a wrong analogy so let's talk based on Wikipedia policies.

Wikipedia warrants an article to be notable and verifiable.

Revirvlkodlaku you initially nominated this article for deletion solely because it was a 3 day event. No statement of whether or not it wasn't notable, which is the only grounds for which an article can be included.

Saying that this article isn't notable purely because it was a 3 day event has no correlation unless you can prove which policy it violates.

I will leave by saying that it's better to suggest improvements or engage in a dialogue to get a deeper understanding even if you have reservations before you go ahead to attempt to withdraw an article from Wikipedia.

This situation is bigger than what it is for it to be merged into the Galamsey article.

PS: If it sounds personal then i apologise. It is not. I just wish you would engage in a discourse beforehand before drawing conclusions. Heatrave (talk) 17:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

@Heatrave, I appreciate your further input on the matter. My main motivation for nominating this page for deletion is that I didn't (and still don't) deem the event to be sufficiently notable to have its own page. There are countless protests all over the world every day, and it's clear that very few get their own page, so how is this one exceptional? Anyway, the topic went through AFD, which determined that the page should be merged into Galamsey. I see no compelling reason not to proceed with the merge, but of course, as events develop, the situation could well change and ultimately warrant a separate page for the topic again, so nothing is permanently lost by going ahead with the merge. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)