Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russia's War Crimes House

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 keep. Article improvement or a potential page move can be discussed on the article talk page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:11, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Russia's War Crimes House[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Does not appear to satisfy WP:GNG. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:03, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Russia, Switzerland, and Ukraine. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:03, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable as a building or a company, appears to be a center to show one side in the recent war between Russia and Ukraine. Oaktree b (talk) 23:12, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. So far coverage is pretty minimal, and WP:NOTNEWS. Does not appear to meet WP:NORG yet. At best, could redirect to Russian war crimes. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:05, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not 'Russian war crimes' but War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Xx236 (talk) 07:59, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, though possibly continue to develop into broader topic of other museums / public education / documentation about the Ukraine War, including Russia's war crimes (and possibly Ukraine war crimes). This could be a list-article. No doubt there are or will be other full museums and major exhibits. Editors should not be deterred by the obviously POV name and focus of this museum/exhibit, it is legitimate/important to cover major POV museums, and of course also allow for sourced reviews/commentary criticizing them for being one-sidedly POV if that applies. Consider, for example, the Museum of Chinese and American War Crimes in the former Saigon, Vietnam. Which was obviously to me a legitimate museum, with signicant artifacts, when I visited many years ago [To be clear, although I would not have been able to read much of the exhibit explanations there, I am sure it was clearly strongly one-sided, did not attempt to present any America-centered justifications which could possibly be made for America's intent and actions. I did believe the artifacts of the war were genuine. --Doncram (talk) 22:09, 23 August 2022 (UTC)] Or, apparently, it might have by then been renamed Exhibition House for Crimes of War and Aggression. It has since be renamed to be less provocative. But how the Vietnamese portrayed American involvement in Vietnam, in museum there and a similarly named one in Hanoi, is legitimate to cover. Also, the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum long had a very POV section covering Watergate, in a side, dark room, where Watergate was quietly dismissed. A new director of the museum, much later, discussed the notability of that coverage, and was intending to showcase/cover that itself. Note The Wall Street Journal article does not take a critical stance as if this is invalid POV, though, and is a substantial reliable source. --Doncram (talk) 23:02, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Further, here is New York Times substantial coverage about another Ukraine War memorial, an exhibit titled Crucified Ukraine at a World War II memorial museum in Kyiv, whichever museum should probably be in Category:World War II memorials in Ukraine and now also Category:Ukraine War memorials. And there are no doubt more, adding up to substantial coverage of the topic area. --Doncram (talk) 23:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doncram: There's already a pretty extensive article on Russia's war crimes during the invasion at War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:02, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The two comments are about memorizing the crimes, not about the crimes. Xx236 (talk) 07:56, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, yes, I am focused upon the memorializing process, which involves exhibits, monuments, museums. I mostly edit about places listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places, which is about artifacts (buildings, monuments, statues, warships, other things) that are large artifacts, that, like items at a museum, with interpretation/education/presentation can evoke the ways, events, etc. of the past to the public. At this Russia House there was a significant exhibit, at least, which attracted significant coverage, although it may or may not become a permanent museum. --Doncram (talk) 22:04, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as well - not a "real" house but more of a happening according to this WaPo story. The house was rented for a week and an exhibition was held there May 22-29. And that's about it. We're unlikely to find new references about it popping up over time (as would be the case for a museum). Superboilles (talk) 19:46, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - even a pop-up art show or biennial can be notable, but the coverage is barely significant. Bearian (talk) 19:18, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (I !voted "Keep" above) Superboilles, thank you for identifying the WaPo article to add. It does now seem that the "Russia's War Crimes House" was an exhibit, not the opening of a permanent museum. I added, to the article, information about other exhibits/memorials regarding the Ukraine war; there are a number of them. I'd like to move this to a title like "Artistic characterizations of the Ukraine War" or "Exhibits, memorials and monuments of the Ukraine War" (at least when there are memorials and monuments to include) or similar. Which I believe is a valid topic already (this is not crystal balling), and which will serve the function of a list-article in collecting much more going forward, avoiding creations and AFDs about individual exhibits/works, or at least indexing them. Most editors are aware of there being various and changing perspectives on the memorialization of the U.S. Civil War, particularly the presentation of Confederate monuments and memorials, which is a big deal. There's much to say about these things. And in Wikipedia there are now categories and list-articles about most or all major wars since then.

I would try to give it a general intro characterizing what artistic works/exhibits/monuments/memorials do, akin to the well-written-in-my-view explanation in lesson plan / teaching materials at this "Facinghistory.org" page, where it's stated: "Monuments and memorials serve multiple functions in the communities in which they are erected. When the members of a community create a monument or memorial, they are making a statement about the ideas, values, or individuals they think their society should remember, if not honor. As a result, these structures not only influence the way people understand the subjects of their commemoration, but they also reveal the beliefs of the people and the time period in which they were created. They thus serve as historical artifacts in themselves." AND "Memorials and monuments are designed to convey forceful messages about the events or individuals they commemorate. Each has embedded in it a particular perspective, an interpretation, a set of values or judgments. As a result, these public structures often raise contentious questions...."

It would be okay by me for this AFD to be concluded "Keep, but move to a more general title and develop...." or similar. --Doncram (talk) 20:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:25, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Associated Press, Bloomberg Quicktake and The Indian Express coverage is significant enough for this exhibition to meet WP:GNG in my opinion. The article itself can do with a rewrite and trimming. IntrepidContributor (talk) 09:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Intrepid. Andre🚐 17:56, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 08:58, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Now there's a PhD dissertation, see "How Ukraine is adapting the ancient practice of trophy displays for modern propaganda" Anya Free, Ph.D. Candidate in History, University of California, Davis, September 9, 2022. Could someone please close this AFD so that editors can consider, at its Talk page, moving the article and expanding it? --Doncram (talk) 06:27, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 21:30, 15 September 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.