Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2025 TikTok refugee crisis

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 merge‎ to Restrictions on TikTok in the United States. If you want to Merge content to other articles, feel free to do so. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 TikTok refugee crisis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

This article's contents should be folded into Xiaohongshu. Amigao (talk) 20:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's too big of an event and article to be folded into Xiahongshou as a sidenote Viceskeeni2 (talk) 20:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to Xiaohongshu, relevant parts could also be merged into Restrictions on TikTok in the United States so as to avoid the current WP:POVFORK situation of this page. - Amigao (talk) 01:42, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:47, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I don't really think it's a crisis, people have looked for another social media app. Likely too soon to see any lasting notability, but I wouldn't draft this. TOOSOON at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 21:10, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Well if it's not a crisis I can simply rename it Viceskeeni2 (talk) 21:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  There you go I renamed it Viceskeeni2 (talk) 21:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. An article about how over half a million people protested on the internet against an important government decision, leading to those people switching a whole app and turning it upside down, is enough for it to be considered a good article. It's a spectacular internet phenomenon and too big of an event to just be put in a different article as a side note like "oh yea this also happened btw"
2. I gave over 25 sources about it, meaning that it was internationally documented, especially on the English side which is what we need, to be an event that's popular enough to have a Wiki page, there are events with far less popularity that still have Wiki pages, and most of the sources are also reliable and the given points in the article are mostly proven by several sources to prove its authenticity.
3. It's definitely an important internet event, I don't think that anything like thhis has ever happened where over half a million and soon probably to be over a million people have switched apps in protest to a government decision. It's literally a protest, just online, why shouldn't it be an own article.
4. If the article was implemented into the REDNote article, it would be too big of an event and probably take up like half or quarter of the article, if an event takes up so much room in one single article, it's definitely enough reason to have it as its own article.
5. You can not deny that this will have a big political consequence and definitely do something to the US-China relations. The US trying to ban an app for being "a spying tool of China" and then half a million Americans switching over to literally a spying tool of China in protest will have its consequences and is a big event, just like I proved in the points above
6. Not only has it been widely reported in English but also:
   

• German
• Chinese
• Arabic
• Turkish
• Spanish
• Polish

I do think these reasons are more than enough to keep this article. Viceskeeni2 (talk) 21:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I honestly don't see any way this won't be notable. I get that we don't keep articles based on that, but I thinks its a waste of time to delete or draftify something that's clearly going to be notable. If I'm wrong, well, there is no deadline. Ping me if it is kept and later re nominated. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 21:30, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. There is already significant sourcing about this phenomenon (although I'm not sure of the best title). Nikkimaria (talk) 04:28, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Please do not move this article until this AFD is closed. Then you can have a discussion on a possible name change. But moving an article to a different title creates problems when closing an AFD or relisting it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:36, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Almost all users have agreed that the name should be changed and it's inappropriate. Viceskeeni2 (talk) 00:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Selective merge of the two paragraphs under "Mass migration" to Restrictions on TikTok in the United States.-KH-1 (talk) 04:55, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Needs a new title if kept. Otherwise, I would not be opposed to a merge to TikTok or Restrictions on TikTok in the United States. Why? I Ask (talk) 05:15, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Selective merge, I back KH-1's proposal. I don't believe this needs an independent article. Kaotao (talk) 08:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to TikTok, Restrictions on TikTok in the United States, and Xiaohongshu. Nothing here needs to be an independent article. Astaire (talk) 19:39, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Selective Merge as appropriate. per Astaire's reasoning. Makes no sense to really combine all of this for what essentially is a social media fad very particular to this moment. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 00:12, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  maybe we should consider reworking this into a new article about 2025 broader bytedance ban Bluethricecreamman (talk) 05:19, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Restrictions on TikTok in the United States and Xiaohongshu. I've copied and pasted the "Mass migration" section from the article to Restrictions_on_TikTok_in_the_United_States#"Mass_migration", and Xiaohongshu already has its own section at Xiaohongshu#2025_popularity_increase. This event does not need a separate standalone article. Some1 (talk) 00:16, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The section is now titled Restrictions_on_TikTok_in_the_United_States#2025_shutdown. Some1 (talk) 15:41, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Restrictions on TikTok in the United States and Xiaohongshu as needed. Other such mass exoduses (such as from Tumblr following its ban of pornographic content and from Twitter to Bluesky in recent times) do not have independent articles. -insert valid name here- (talk) 00:19, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yea but the other ones weren't a result of political tensions. This one will, like another editor said, definitely have political consequences. Also, the othee ones weren't as documented as this one is. Viceskeeni2 (talk) 10:37, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Restrictions on TikTok in the United States as the others have proposed. A separate article might be necessary if that one gets too big.

MapperGuy87 (talk) 16:33, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The event has more than enough independent documentation as is, and this will only grow with time. None of the merges proposed sound satisfying, nor do the suggested articles have scopes that can really capture the different cultural, political nuances of this situation. Phibeatrice (talk) 00:29, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Restrictions on TikTok in the United States, of which this page is a WP:POVFORK. Bearian (talk) 06:56, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Simply a POV fork, and an offensively named one at that. Qwirkle (talk) 07:03, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  How the heck is it POV fork or offensive Viceskeeni2 (talk) 10:36, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I’d suggest you go to Gaza or South Sudan and ask someone there this question. Maybe phrase it “Do you think you have it as bad as the poor TikTokites?” Qwirkle (talk) 16:39, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Buddy I already changed the name to the one tbe talk page has but it got reverted Viceskeeni2 (talk) 18:25, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Threads gained 30 million users in one day and we don't have a separate article about that. 2.7 million users is minuscule and accounts for a small proportion of both apps. NOT a "mass migration" as claimed and definitely WP:TOOSOON. Separately, the article title reads like The Onion. Is there any way to move it temporarily before this deletion discussion concludes? There's already a number of users here that have concerns about the title as it is obviously inappropriate.

Queen Douglas DC-3 (talk) 12:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me how the title is inappropriate and if you cannot then please stop spreading misinformation Viceskeeni2 (talk) 12:46, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article title is inappropriate because it doesn't appear to comply with the article titles policy. I also want to add that this event isn't dissimilar to the Twitter-Threads migration last year. Queen Douglas DC-3 (talk) 12:57, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I said to change it like another user suggested but not possible cuz it's being deleted Viceskeeni2 (talk) 16:17, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is different as the twitter threads migration was from a mainly Americian app to another mainly Americian app but the TikTok to REDnote migration is a mainly Americian app to a mainly Chinese app allowing a mix of cultures and languages. Lecket (talk) 11:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that this would fall under WP:NOTDIARY. Queen Douglas DC-3 (talk) 13:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the Threads event wasn't the aftermath of political tensions and a half a decade long fight. Like another user said, this event will most likely definitely have some political aftermath. The Threads one was just opposing what an independent billionaire says, this one is an online protest against the government that has, in this form or any form even I think, never happened Viceskeeni2 (talk) 00:35, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hear, hear. There is absolutely no point in this article; the entire event is spread by the media trying to entertain people with stories of low quality. Wikipedia is not used to record every single news event and definitely not for things like a virtual 'refugee crisis'. CS012831 (talk) 20:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per others above. In any case, people using a different app isn't a "refugee crisis" - that's reserved for real-world displacement. Heythereimaguy (talk) 16:05, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I had already moved the article to a more appropriate name but it was reverted Viceskeeni2 (talk) 16:17, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge as stated by others above. Havok (T/c/e) 10:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Restrictions on TikTok in the United States. Procyon117 (talk) 11:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Restrictions on TikTok in the United States, TikTok, and Xiaohongshu as said above. This is a major event in all three topics, so it will make sense to merge it into these three articles. JekyllTheFabulous (talk) 12:20, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Wikipedia is not the news. This is not a notable event, but rather an implied theory. EvenOvenlord17 (talk) 12:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge as others have said into Restrictions on TikTok in the United States, but with a different name. Griffin6679 (talk) 17:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this title. Some content could be copied into other articles ("merged"), but "refugee crisis" is not an appropriate title or redirect and should be deleted. Plantdrew (talk) 17:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Sure I'd change it, but I'm not allowed to Viceskeeni2 (talk) 19:20, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge content and delete the title, per above. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 18:41, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep• its a symbol of defiance against tyranny, a major event for one of the biggest platforms in the world, results in huge communication and the dismantling of barriers between the peoples of the USA and China, and its internationally documented. I would say rename it though. Jayson (talk) 18:51, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Right the Great Wrong, eh? Qwirkle (talk) 18:57, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Restrictions on TikTok in the United States. "Refugee crisis" is beyond absurd and it is not notable enough to warrant a separate article. Horarum (talk) 20:01, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

then let me change the title of the article if it's so bad. You complain about the name being bad and then complain when I change it 🙏🙏 Viceskeeni2 (talk) 21:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The title in the delete request is 2025 TikTok refugee crisis, someone moved the page to 2025 TikTok–REDnote migration and the talk page is Talk:2025 TikTok–REDnote mass migration. Can someone more knowledgeable fix this? Queen Douglas DC-3 (talk) 05:00, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Tik Tok came back online anyway, this is part of the larger story around the app, not a single article-worthy subject. Oaktree b (talk) 12:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The article's title has been changed so that no longer is an issue, but so far there isn't much unique content for an independent article. This event may also be too recent. CurryCity (talk) 19:06, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Restrictions on TikTok in the United States. Though a notable event, there isn't much to cover about it. It is simply a migration from TikTok to REDnote that was caused by the TikTok ban. Sussywidget (talk) 19:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per the arguments above. Personisinsterest (talk) 15:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge suggestion for its important topic and opposed deletion. QalasQalas (talk) 16:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Regardless of the eventual outcome, this has been a highly notable event in internet and social media history on an international scale. FBryz (talk) 17:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Restrictions on TikTok in the United States: I see the title has been changed from refugee crisis, which was not just stupid but incredibly crass considering the suffering of actual refugees. But even so, there is no evidence that this "migration" meets the WP:LASTING test of WP:NEVENT. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. A selective merger is appropriate here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Most of the media is covering it. CaribDigita (talk) 21:19, 22 January 2025 (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.