The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine has demonstrated the reality of the allegations last year covered in this article. I think it is important for it to exist as it is part of the build up to the February invasion. As stated in the deletion discussion, there is an article for the 2016 Montenegrin coup allegations. These allegations obviously do not have the geopolitical significance as the Ukrainian ones. I would appreciate a review of the article. Perhaps another deletion discussion would be helpful? Thriley (talk) 22:04, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Endorce, Allow draftification. It was properly deleted per WP:NOTNEWS, but the content and reference in the history could be used in another article. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I do not expect undeletion to draft to lead to fruit, but to satisfaction for User:Thriley, to be sure that no worthy information is being lost.
Alternatively, list the reference(s) used here. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at Thriley’s three sources offered in the AfD, I suggest that he looking to whether mention of this announced coup rumour can get a mention at 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine#Prelude. I’m not sure it can, I think sources independent of the Ukrainian President are needed, commenting on his comments, to beat NOTNEWS. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse deletion I would not be opposed to a draft, but I think it'd be a waste of time. This was a nothingburger, and no sources since then have covered this in any meaningful light. Curbon7 (talk) 09:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse deletion I see no indication that the AfD was closed incorrectly and people there did raise legitimate arguments that a) it doesn't need a separate article and b) the sources are just repeating the same announcement. There is an ongoing war, that doesn't mean that every little thing that happened in it needs its own article. I am not explicitly opposed to a draft, but don't support it either per Curbon7's point. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse draftification The information at the very least could be rescued and merged into the main invasion article. --NoonIcarus (talk) 13:36, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse deletion, a correct close.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse as the right close of the discussion (without having seen the original article), without opinion on any draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
CommentThriley, I think you neglected to inform the AFD closer about this discussion which I believe is part of the process of Deletion Review. LizRead!Talk! 03:27, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
