Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bomb blasts in Parachinar since 2007

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 merge to the appropriate sublists of List of terrorist incidents in Pakistan since 2001. A Train^talk 10:26, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bomb blasts in Parachinar since 2007[edit]

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

Completely arbitrary. Fails to establish its notability. Who said Bomb blasts should be there? and why since 2007? Greenbörg (talk) 07:55, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. Jupitus Smart 08:41, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Jupitus Smart 08:41, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand. Sources:

Shias in Pakistan's Parachinar caught in the middle of proxy wars, DW [1]
Sixth attack on Shias in Parachinar highlights growing intolerance in Pakistan Hindustan Times [2]E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:21, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@E.M.Gregory: We could have article on Persecution of Shia Muslims in Pakistan but can't have this arbitrary pick. Greenbörg (talk) 13:13, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are a series of notable bombings, and as per WP:PRESERVE the proper course is to keep this article on a notable topic and to move the discussion about how best to improve it, either by refocusing it as a broader discussion of anti-Shia persecution that would include terrorism, or keeping and improving this article by connecting it to one or more broader articles on the situation of Shia in Pakistan. Those questions can be raised here, but should, ultimately, be handled on the talk page.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:40, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:26, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:41, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge any useful info, possibly into Terrorism in Pakistan or List of terrorist incidents in Pakistan since 2001. Some of the sources included are non-RS and a lot of the analysis looks like OR. If kept or merged, the "Reasons behind attacks" section will need to either be properly referenced or removed completely, as right now its only source is a polemical Wordpress blog.PohranicniStraze (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the useful content. Original research should be deleted. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 23:31, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge As a nominator, I will be happy with a merge. Greenbörg (talk) 14:38, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reason behind this Page[edit]

Parachinar is a Shiite majority area and since 2007 there are frequent bomb explosions in a small area which need attention. Since 2007, the bomb explosions in Parachinar started because the people of here fought against the Taliban, ( War against Taliban in Parachinar )and Taliban & its allies are now bombed to take revenge. Social media regarding Parachinar is full of propaganda, most of these propaganda may cause more explosions in future, so it is important to tell the world, the facts. Haider4Pak (talk) 00:30, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - That's all fine and good, but per WP:SOAP, wikipedia is not a place for advocacy, regardless of the worthiness of the cause. Reporting reliably sourced information is fine, but not issue advocacy, and as it stands the entire "Reason behind the attacks" section is sourced only to a non-reliable source, and several of the other references go to web forums or facebook, which also aren't exactly reliable. Whether the article is kept or merged, the sourcing needs to be improved.PohranicniStraze (talk) 14:25, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus at this time is for a merge, but two potential merge targets have been presented.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:42, 17 July 2017 (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.