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 speedy Move to draft. Needs translating prior to being considered for deletion. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 23:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Projet Cozak (J-Tech) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This article (even if properly translated into English) does not merit inclusion in Wikipedia. It relates in excessive detail the criminal activities of two brothers in Quebec. The crimes are not especially notorious (drugs and firearms possession) and the sources not especially significant. The article appears to be an attempt to publish a defense of the accused, but Wikipedia is not really the proper forum for that. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:29, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 16:53, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

If you had actually read the article you would know that all the accused have been acquitted. There is no crimes being discussed.

The article is well documented and sourced, has made first page newspaper in Quebec multiple times. There is ten's of newspaper articles in Canada and around the world. Accused are now suing the state for 22,5 millions $.

Criminal court case being closed its not even close to an attempt at defense, just reporting facts based on documentation.

Finally, level of details is moderate and is exposing a concerning situation about police investigators in Quebec. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacquesCasgrain (talk • contribs) 17:05, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment @JacquesCasgrain: Sorry if I misinterpreted the details. I don't read French fluently (this is, after all, the English language Wikipedia), so I had to rely on a Google translation of the article. Nevertheless, nothing you've said here bolsters the claim of notability for this case. It appears to be a run-of-the-mill case of a pair of defendants suing for perceived misconduct of the police. If anything comes of the case (if the case turns into a precedent that becomes widely cited in other Canadian court cases), then it might rise to the point of notability, but not yet. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point. It is a notable case for Quebec and its people. Google "Cozak" or "Daniel Cozak"and you'll see all the articles and the interest. I mean its a Ph.D. Chemist being accused of operating the biggest meth lab in america... and he gets aquitted by a stay of procedures... Then again i don't think you were aware of that because you did not read the article.Now that the criminal case is closed a well documented article has its place. I will wait to see the outcome of this deletion request before putting more work into this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacquesCasgrain (talk • contribs) 17:13, 1 March 2018 (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.