Deletion of Cannibalism in China

Comment: re|Cunard}} I have downloaded and evaluated the books by Zheng Yi and Gang Yue that Cunard has mentioned and I'll link their publisher's webpage here, along with other related sources, so people can purchase/download the works legally and check that I am evaluating these books fairly. I will hesitate to credit Zheng Yi's book https://www.routledge.com/Scarlet-Memorial-Tales-Of-Cannibalism-In-Modern-China/Zheng/p/book/9780813326160 Scarlet Memorial: Tales of Cannibalism in Modern China as a reliable source because it has received its fair bit of criticism on the reliability of its writing. For instance, Gang Yue (who is, notably, the other source Cunard mentioned), writes on page 251 in his book https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv125jmwq The Mouth That Begs: Hunger, Cannibalism, and the Politics of Eating in Modern China that "(Scarlet Memorial) can and must be read as a fictional text, despite the author's claim to historical accuracy and scientific truth" and describes Scarlet memorial as "political polemic" on page 246. In fact, a large part of chapter 6 (Pages 228 - 261) in Gang Yue's book is a critique of Zheng Yi's work and its reliability. This https://www.jstor.org/stable/26237369?seq=1 review and this https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280777795_Inscribing_the_Unspeakable_a_review_of_Scarlet_Memorial_Tales_of_Cannibalism_in_Modern_China_by_Zheng_Yi_trans_TP_Sym_Boulder_Colorado_Westview_Press_1996 review (along with others quoted in them) also notes that the book lacks evidence, has implicit Sino-centric assumptions concerning minorities, is prone to speculation and has a political bias that underlies it's claims. Now, onto Gang Yue's book https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv125jmwq The Mouth That Begs: Hunger, Cannibalism, and the Politics of Eating in Modern China itself. His book focuses mostly on "cannibalism" and "hunger" as literary metaphors and motifs for the social and political disorder and decay in twentieth-century China rather than an actual account of cannibalism in China. Most of the book focuses only on fictional literary depictions of cannibalism, and when Gang Yue does make a statement on real-life cannibalism, he states on page 62 that "Above all, one would be hard put to believe that real cannibalism has been a systematic social practice since the dawn of Chinese civilization, and the topic is more suitable for tall tales than serious literature". To me, it just seems... very counter-productive to retain a page titled "Cannibalism in China" (even as a page that redirects to another article) just to maintain a source which itself states that cannibalism isn't a part of Chinese culture in the real world at all. As such, both sources don't really provide much reliable information about real-world practices of cannibalism in China. As per , extraordinary claims require multiple high-quality sources. In this case, not only are there only a few sources, neither of the sources I have evaluated in this comment (which were deemed the most reliable out of the bunch) are high-quality enough in supporting the claims of cannibalism. In fact, one of the sources (Gang Yue's book) even contradicted the claims. Thus, I still think we should '''Delete''' the article and that there aren't enough good sources or content about the subject to merit a standalone page either
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:EXTRAORDINARY)

Comment: I have reviewed the prior revisions that Cunard mentions, and the potential that the article "may" contain useful content is simply not there. The singular book source that Cunard mentions is probably the only one worth saving. If we want to expand our coverage of this subject, we should |start completely over
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: per {{u|Jumpytoo}}. The article's topic appears to be notable, but it doesn't actually appear to be separately notable than those two entries, and I don't see a need for a  from the Human cannibalism page. There are articles in other wikipedia (such as French, Chinese, and Vietnamese wikipedias) that cover this topic. The Chinese-language article appears to be particularly long and detailed, so it may be worth it to also incorporate some of the content from there into the articles, though we should be careful in ensuring that content moved over matches the sourcing standards on this Wikipedia (the specifics on the  equivalents do not appear to be the same, so there might be differences in community consensus on source reliability more generally
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:CFORK||WP:RSP)

Comment: with Human cannibalism#China, but the content isn't bad. The Cannibalism as medicine suffers from  issues, but the historical content is OK
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: Per nom & SailingInABathTub, it's mainly linked to one major incident and would be better covered there. We don't write summary articles for isolated incidents and doing so for only one country would be 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE)

Comment: The article's introduction is pure racist belief. The creator should be blocked per o Nazis
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)