Talk:2018 German government crisis

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 July 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

Germany High‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Title of the topic

I found instructions for closing the AfD and did that. I consider the title to be too ambiguous. All the content is about the European migrant crisis but the title covers all crisis of the German government for the entire year. There is little that can be presented about the migrant crisis in Germany without overlapping into 2017, and how are we to know it will be over in 2019? I propose the topic is changed to European migrant crisis (Germany) or German migrant crisis or something better. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 18:11, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for closing the AfD discussion. Regarding the title: The article is focussed on the ongoing crisis within the German government. Main articles regarding the European migrant crisis can be mentioned and linked as see also. The title "government crisis" is well sourced and only refers to the incidents of the last weeks. In Germany initially also "Asylstreit" (lit. asylum quarrel) was used. Though this is to unspecific in my opinion, it can be used a redirect. In the recent days it is more and more referred to as a government crisis by all reputable media, and that's what it is in fact.--Greywin (talk) 18:23, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well we can wait and see if a better title emerges later on. I do see your point. And this is a current event after all. 18:30, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Why can this material not be put into the Fourth Merkel cabinet article? Other articles about German governments contain details of their individual "crises". Deb (talk) 07:17, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That might work, this article does seem to focus on that subject. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 09:34, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But the cabinet article (which I created too) would then mostly contain this crisis. I am not convinced, because then there would be demands that information about the crisis has to be reduced because of NPOV - and that might be what certain people want. I think it would be a better way to expand the cabinet article step by step and link this "crisis" article there.--Greywin (talk) 12:14, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the other German cabinet articles are quite long, so it would be entirely consistent.Deb (talk) 14:12, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not against a long cabinet article. I am only against merging this one in, because this might lead to reduction instead of expansion. More detailed is better than less detailed. And this article can and will be expanded with more specific material (reactions, domestic and abroad...) And if you look into the related category, there are more "government crisis" articles about similar or less important crises. After all, I know my ever-present shadow and can't help to wonder if the true reason is not "consistency" but deletion and reduction of disliked information. ;)--Greywin (talk) 15:09, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the problem is that this is not a well defined crisis, but a running commentary on the issues faced by the Fourth Merkel cabinet over 2018. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 15:18, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is a well defined (government) crisis? Is there one? A government crisis is what the sources call government crisis. According to my reading of the sources, this starts in mid-June. But feel free to present sources that call it a "government crisis" earlier.--Greywin (talk) 15:58, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A well defined government crisis is one that has a name or description other than "government crisis". Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 16:05, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And how high is the percentage of such cases? And how should that matter? Again, it's in the sources.--Greywin (talk) 16:10, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no answer? Hmmm...--Greywin (talk) 17:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Crisis? What crisis?

If this is a crisis, what was the thing you had in Germany after last year's election, which was more widely reported by the world's media than any present crisis that may exist? Deb (talk) 07:42, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is partly what I am complaining about. I don't see this topic correctly representing the subject. I have been told that the content is worthwhile according to policy and I don't dislike the article. But the idea that what is happening in Germany right now is limited to 2018 is not convincing. However if you see the arguments already made above, there is no better title in sources at this time. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 16:00, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deb Do you know the difference between a government crisis (of an existing government) and coalition talks (of parties)? If they wouldn't have a led to a new government they maybe could have led to a state crisis (at least it is called Staatskrise [1] in German, I don't know if the term exists in English). But a government was formed then, so there was no state crisis. And as I said, a huge amount of sources call the recent events a government crisis, so, also as Frayae stated, this is the correct title at present.--Greywin (talk) 19:52, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be a misrepresentation what Frayæ said. The title is misleading because, like the other article titled European migrant crisis, it implies that the government crisis (and there is no such article in English wikipedia, because it is not a term commonly used in English) only began this year - though clearly it began in 2017 - and that it exists in a vacuum. I believe more contextual information is needed. Deb (talk) 06:15, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But the background section already contains detailed information about the beginning and "prequel" of the crisis. I don't understand the problem.--Greywin (talk) 12:17, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed? Hardly. It concentrates on immigration and doesn't mention other issues that are mentioned in the cited reference. Deb (talk) 14:11, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Look into the sources. What is described as "crisis" here are the last few weeks, not the whole government term. And this crisis is about immigration. --Greywin (talk) 15:13, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that just sounds like an excuse to turn this into an article on problems related to immigration. Of course, it's easier to do that if you limit the time period to 2018 as you wish to. Deb (talk) 15:23, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article about related to immigration. This is reason for proposed new title. If this problems cannot be resolved then deletion may be back to consideration. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 15:28, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't get your point. Why should this ever be deleted? There's a worldwide media reception exceeding the vast majority of other events, there was an EU summit... what's the problem? No article will be deleted because someone thinks there is a wrong title. And @Deb: you want to turn the issue into an issue not related to immigration. But, sad but true: that's the issue of this government crisis, if you like it or not.--Greywin (talk) 16:03, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And zero arguments left here, too...--Greywin (talk) 17:50, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV tagging

Why is this article tagged for NPOV? If there are no sufficient reasons given on this talk page, the tagging will be removed.--Greywin (talk) 19:52, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it, I cannot possibly see how the text is biased towards anyone. All ideas in the article match the ideas in the sources. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 20:15, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merger

I think the case has been made for merging this article into Fourth Merkel cabinet. The only reason I can see for not doing so is to separate the events of mid-2018 from a sequence to which they obviously belong. Deb (talk) 16:24, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

{{Merge to |Fourth Merkel cabinet |date=July 2018 }}Deb (talk) 16:33, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support with the note that this article in no way addresses the wider issue of the European migrant crisis, and I do not expect that t be fully covered after a merge if that is the result. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 16:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose The merger proposal is defective. The government crisis - so do the sources say - happened in June and July 2018. The sources are decisive here. The merger's purpose is obviously made to reduce or delete the material via NPOV tagging in the Merkel cabinet article - for reasons of WP:IJUSTDON'TLIKEIT, a silent deletion of an event of European dimensions. And even if we follow your arguments a bit and assume for a moment this article was about the German asylum policy as a whole: Why does the asylum policy only belong to the Fourth Merkel cabinet? You said it started much earlier. The political differences started much, much earlier! But that is not the issue of the article, even if mentioned as a background or "prequel", as this article is about the 2018 German government crisis, which is clearly defined by many WP:RS.--Greywin (talk) 17:48, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Even Washington Post and New York Times call this a "government crisis" but surely the non-arguments made here without any sources weigh more...--Greywin (talk) 18:15, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see, we have BBC, The Times, Reuters, Deutsche Welle, Frankfurter Allgemeine, Der Spiegel, Die Zeit, Bloomberg, Wash Post, New York Times calling it a government crisis. So if everyone calls it a duck, maybe it is a duck?--Greywin (talk) 18:32, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The entire content of the article is being merged here. No content is proposed for deletion. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 22:19, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The merge proposal here is completely wrong, so nothing will be moved. You have read my arguments, and no one could refute them. Why should this be related only to the Fourth Merkel Cabinet? There is not a single reason for this. And dozens of high class sources justify an own article. Sorry, this is maybe the most unjustified merger proposal I ever saw. Addition: The discussion should be led where it was started, so I will move it back.--Greywin (talk) 23:12, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the debate to the relevant section: Talk:Fourth_Merkel_cabinet#Merger proposal. Deb (talk) 20:37, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus for moving the debate, as there is no reason to do so. It should be led where it was started.--Greywin (talk) 23:14, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I re-added the discussion.--Greywin (talk) 23:17, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is absolutely no consensus to move this discussion. Please act according WP:TPO: If there is any objection to moving any posts, Stop. There is a context on this talk page which is important for this discussion, so stop moving!--Greywin (talk) 08:42, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The proposed merger was actually started on the wrong page, the tags automatically link to Talk:Fourth Merkel cabinet, therefore I suggest a note on that page linking back here if the discussion is going to be here. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 08:48, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any wrong links, the tag above links to the merge target. The context of arguments on this page is important. And I don't want my posts to be moved without my permission.--Greywin (talk) 08:53, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since the discussion is here, it should remain here. On that we are agreed. But if you press "(discuss)" on the tag above it sends you to the other article. The instructions for proposed mergers also say "Put one of the merger tags at the top of the articles you wish to be merged". So I don't think Deb has completed all the steps. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 09:06, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have done exactly what is required. I have put the merger tags at the top of each article and the template automatically starts the discussion in a single place. It doesn't mean that people won't come here to look for other information. However, if you carry on posting comments here, instead of in the discussion location at Talk:Fourth_Merkel_cabinet#Merger proposal, then no one will be reading these comments when it is time to close the discussion. Deb (talk) 10:38, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, this is hopelessly confusing now. Can we just keep all the discussion on this page because it's easier to keep it one place? Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:47, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then how will people find it when they link from the Wikipedia:Proposed mergers entry? Deb (talk) 11:02, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We could put a link on Talk:Fourth Merkel cabinet linking back here so anyone going to that page comes here. Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 11:07, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've done that, and also notified Wikiproject Germany. Deb (talk) 12:22, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]