Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Western Wall Tunnel riots

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 keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) nableezy - 22:17, 27 November 2021 (UTC) 22:17, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Western Wall Tunnel riots

[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)

Entirely unsourced article, with the only reference noted being the Hebrew Wikipedia. I have no idea if any of this is real or not, but as it stands if one removes all material lacking an inline citation per WP:V there is quite literally nothing left. Nableezy 20:01, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Nableezy 20:01, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. Nableezy 20:01, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Did you check for additional sources per WP:BEFORE? It looked for 30 seconds and I found 1996 articles in the New York Times[1], LA Times[2], and Mideast Quarterly[3]. Plus an analysis from 2000 in the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, [4] and 2014 retrospective in the Jerusalem Post[5].

Seems unquestionably notable per WP:DIVERSE and WP:LASTING. It needs proper sourcing, but that's no reason to delete it. -- Bob drobbs (talk) 20:36, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, if one were to remove every sentence lacking an inline citation what is left is an empty article. Yes, not having a single source is a reason to delete it. Its been five years since this was created. Not a single source has been cited in that time. nableezy - 20:42, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this article seems to have degraded severely in time, with an IP editor replacing the sourced version with an entirely unsourced account. Reverting and withdrawing. nableezy - 22:16, 27 November 2021 (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.