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 and I don't think one is forthcoming out of another week of discussion. Star Mississippi 15:47, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WhatsApp snooping scandal[edit]

WhatsApp snooping scandal (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)

The article is about the same event as Pegasus Project (investigation), though all its content is about Pegasus Project revelations in India. It has already been covered extensively in the above two articles and this page does not add anything substantial to it Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 10:30, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment- Also qualifies for WP:SPEEDYDELETE under WP:G5.Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 16:39, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:33, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:42, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:42, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:42, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:43, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:43, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Perhaps can even be speedied under WP:G5. hemantha (brief) 10:54, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I hadnt noticed that.Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 13:51, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with Pegasus Project revelations in India: per WP:ATD when a reasonable target exists, as pointed by the OP. Merge because both are essentially the same topic. Venkat TL (talk) 11:17, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would have supported merge as well, but this article really has nothing that the original article does not cover already. It seems the author created it without realising the existence of the other articles.Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 13:51, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@CapnJackSp how are you so sure? have you checked every line and reference? I randomly looked and found that the Pegasus article does not have mention of Priyanka Gandhi, while this article has it along with reference. I still stand by my decision. Venkat TL (talk) 14:47, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did go through the reference, it seems quite confusing and Im honestly confused as to how we would include it into the pegasus article. The source states that "WhatsApp did not say that the phone was hacked in this fashion by an illegal Pegasus software" in the message sent to State secretary Priyanka Gandhi, but also says that the Congress alleged the phone had been sent a message related to the app? If you can provide a concise summation of the news article, I would be more than happy to add to the existing article on Pegasus. To me, the news article seems to imply that the message sent to Mrs. Priyanka's phone had nothing to do with pegasus in particular, but was some sort of message from Whatsapp.Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 15:07, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on second thoughts, I see that both article have different scope. WhatsApp snooping scandal covers the revalation in 2019, while the article Pegasus Project revelations in India, as the name suggests, discussed the investigative report by Group of journalist on Pegasus project published in 2021. Venkat TL (talk) 15:20, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Received minor coverage. Also per WP:G5. LearnIndology (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment @LearnIndology: Dear friend, the issue got enough coverage. If added all, then there would be citation bombing. :) --NeverTry4Me - TT page 00:42, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I have removed the CSD tag as other editors have contributed to this article. The ban-evading editor has to be the sole contributor or there have to be no substantial contributions from other editors. Please decided whether to keep or delete the page in this discussion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:12, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for now, since Pegasus Project revelations in India is about a journalist investigation, and is not a suitable merge target. Eventually, all these pages can be merged into a more comprehensive page on Pegasus spyware in India. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:25, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for now, pursuant to Kautilya3's reasoning. Let us revisit in a couple of years. TrangaBellam (talk) 16:52, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and I agree with Kautilya3. Such a subject shouldn't be deleted. It should be KEEP and expanded with more resources. --NeverTry4Me - TT page 23:51, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Enough contributions from other editors that G5 is not applicable IMO. More time to discuss merit of a standalone would be helpful
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:25, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep agree with Kautilya3. - SUN EYE 1 16:58, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:41, 13 February 2022 (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.