Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 Sukma attack

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. A possible merger can continue to be discussed on the talk page. Sandstein 09:33, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2018 Sukma attack[edit]

2018 Sukma attack (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Sukma attack Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Created by a block evading sock. Fails WP:NOTNEWS. Capitals00 (talk) 05:49, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep — This event has received significant independent coverage. It is receiving substantial ongoing coverage (e.g. here), as well. —{{u|Goldenshimmer}}｜✝️｜they/their｜😹｜T/C｜☮️｜John 15:12｜🍂 07:59, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 08:56, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 08:56, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 08:56, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 08:56, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per WP:NCRIME. A dramatically "successful" murderous attack in the ongoing militant Maoist Naxalites insurgency, claimed as such by a militant terrorist wing of an active, ideologically committed political insurgency. It is asserted, moreover, that this bombing was a response to a government raid the previous week in which 10 militants were killed. Media coverage has been more than sufficient to support an article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. per WP:RAPID. Widely covered in the media - on-going coverage of the event from event in 13 March through today.Icewhiz (talk) 13:52, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Should be merged/redirected with Naxalite–Maoist insurgency. There is no enough coverage on this event unlike April 2010 Maoist attack in Dantewada to merit its own page. The article has seen a lot of unnecessary content inflation like the reactions section. Similarly, recounting a CRPF director's comments is not really needed per WP:NOTNEWS. If at a later stage there is enough content available then it can be split into a separate page. Adamgerber80 (talk) 13:54, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Naxalite–Maoist insurgency. Keep WP:NOTNEWS in mind. I don't see any significant updates in this issue that would be WP:DUE enough to include on main article. D4iNa4 (talk) 17:47, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Selectively) Merge - Glad to see an appropriate merge target. Coverage, as usual with topics that fall under WP:NOTNEWS, came in brief bursts. Granted, there was a brief burst recently on an arrest, but that clearly does not fall out of the norm of what is reported. Those who cite WP:RAPID, a recommendation at best, fail to address the first half of what they are citing--that good ol' "do not rush to create articles" tidbit. Considering NOTNEWS, a fundamental policy, supports that principle, a merger is the most appropriate action.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 18:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merge as per WP:RAPID and because it is dysfunctional. Merging into a sentence in a list results in a loss of information that our readers expect to be able to access on major insurgent and terrorist attacks. Article is well-written, well-sourced, and is being expanded as sources emerge. E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:01, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously you would oppose a merge if you voted keep...A few problems too with that "rationale": the merge target isn't even a list, merging isn't dysfunctional if you know how to write, being "well-written" is irrelevant and a stretch to say the least, and our readers expect encyclopedic content, not news updates.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 13:20, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Naxalite–Maoist insurgency; agree per Adamgerber80 and TheGracefulSlick. —MBL talk 13:24, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The nom claim for deletion is based on a misreading of policy. The policy is aimed against entertainment news. Specifically, WP:NOTNEWS reads "routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia." This case on the contrary is a Communist terror attack on the largest democracy in the world, with 15 casualties. Besides, this is clearly not "routine news reporting" on "announcements, sports, or celebrities". This is routine news reporting a major crime and therefore WP:NOTNEWS does not apply. I can only recommend re-reading the policy. Besides, the unsound arguments in favor of NOTNEWS are trumped by WP:NCRIME, so keeping ought to be adjudicated by default. XavierItzm (talk) 23:33, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Never ceases to amaze me that the same two or three editors misrepresent NOTNEWS so badly. To actually believe crime, and yes even terrorism, are not daily occurrences covered by the news is total ignorance. When NOTNEWS states: "routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities", it requires common sense (and basic knowledge of the word like) to understand that the policy is providing examples but there are others; a "good" crime/terrorist story has not suddenly become an exception. This incident, like others you insist on keeping and thus rendering the encyclopedia a second-rate news cite, sees wire-tapped stories but never any historical significance or analysis.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:07, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A clear failure to understand the plain meaning of the policy. Among "announcements, sports, terrorist massacres, celebrities" which one is not like the others? All I can suggest is reading WP:NOTNEWS again. XavierItzm (talk) 05:36, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The dull-wittedness willfully displayed here would be astounding if it weren't just so sad.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 14:05, 28 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2018_Sukma_attack&oldid=1086053655"