Talk:2013 Zanzibar acid attack

Notability and applicability to Wikipedia
As sad and upsetting as this incident may be and continues to be for the victims of the attack, it is poorly written and edited, and is now unfortunately, out of date. More importantly, it is unlikely that the topic meets the Wikipedia's notability and applicability criteria and there is a strong case for its immediate deletion.Barmispain (talk) 10:20, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I for one strongly disagree, it remains a highly noteworthy and shocking acid attack. It set an important precedent, being an unprovoked acid attack upon tourists, and it remains unpunished. Rather than issue blanket criticisms, how about addressing the faults by correcting them? I have no connection to the family, or the country, and no financial interest in the article. It would be helpful if other editors also declared any conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise. Cpsoper (talk) 20:28, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Strongly disagree. While it is poorly written, this was a major news story. I'd support merging it into a related article (whatever that would be?). But the case for "immediate deletion" is extremely poor. Fluous (talk) 10:46, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree. At least, why is the section 'Prior Incidents' included? There is no citable evidence that the first two bullet points are related events. Certainly, church burnings should need much more clarity to be called relevant. This leans away from objective reporting and towards an agenda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.45.159 (talk) 15:37, 4 August 2017 (UTC)