Gpedia:Articles for deletion/Off ramp (diplomacy)

Jump to navigation Jump to search
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 De-escalation#Military tactics. Liz Read! Talk! 05:56, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Off ramp (diplomacy)

Off ramp (diplomacy) (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 · NYT · WP Library)

Non-notable concept that has only passing mentions in any of the listed sources. This alone is not enough for WP:GNG. I would also support merging this into exit strategy as it is nothing more than a special case of this broad concept. — Shibbolethink ( ) 12:33, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Add - I still think exit strategy is a far better target. An 'off ramp' is an exit strategy offered by one party to the other. I think deescalation is far broader, and it feels like we are shoe-horning this if we redirect. ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 17:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Merge and Delete to exit strategy per nominator and user above. Seems to make the most sense. SPF121188 (talk this way) (contribs) 13:11, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep Merge and Redirect to De-escalation#Military tactics as per Bakkster Man- Exit strategy refers to a plan derived by a state to extricate themselves from a situation, while off-ramp is more about one state offering another state a way to deescalate or otherwise disengage from a situation, whether by discretely offering some concession or positioning so as to allow the other state or leader a way to save face. One cannot say that the offramp is a special case of an exit strategy, because there is a fundamentally different dynamic at play. I do think the term is notable in itself, because although none of the articles using it go into depth analyzing the term itself, it has a lot of circulation in academic international relations literature; for example see here. It's something that is more appropriate for an encyclopedia than a dictionary, because the concept also has a history and applications in multiple fields, including negotiation and mediation, as mentioned in this NYT piece. Chagropango (talk) 13:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Merge to De-escalation#Military tactics. As per Chagropango this is a specific tactic to de-escalate a conflict, specifically by offering an adversary an alternate path to escalation, rather than an exit strategy which is one party's self-motivated withdrawl. Not sure there's enough interest in expanding the topic beyond a dictionary definition (such as above suggestion to expand on past examples of de-escalation described as off-ramps; including Israel-Palestine, North Korea, Iran, et al), but at least the merge would put the term into the right article. Bakkster Man (talk) 14:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I am totally happy with a Merge to De-escalation#Military tactics. Did not consider that possibility but it makes sense. I've already migrated some of the content [1], but happy with whatever everyone thinks is best upon closure of this. — Shibbolethink ( ) 15:21, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Merge and redirect to Exit strategy, per El cid., Chagropango, and Bakkster Man. I agree that it is a more precise target. Sal2100 (talk) 21:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Note: @Shibbolethink: Due to an error I have corrected in Special:Diff/1107260123, Twinkle did not actually list the nomination at Gpedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Social science. The nomination has now been listed there. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 02:19, 29 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Merge this is a clear merge situation. No WP:SIGCOV for this as a separate topic and it's basically a synonym for exit strategy in a diplomatic context. Jontesta (talk) 13:54, 29 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We've got 2 different Merge targets proposed here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 14:24, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[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.
The article is a derivative under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. A link to the original article can be found here and attribution parties here. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use. Gpedia Ⓡ is a registered trademark of the Cyberajah Pty Ltd.