Talk:Novofedorivka incident

Merger debate?
Someone proposed that this be merged into 2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine. No one started a discussion or expressed any opinion one way or the other. Given the lack of sources, I would cautiously support.--Martin BerkaT&#124;C 18:00, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Also support.Volunteer Marek (talk) 21:10, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong support - But this should be merged with 2014 Crimean crisis as part of its aftermath, not into 2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 03:28, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Separate incident with wide press coverage. The same as Simferopol incident. NickSt (talk) 10:34, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Support Khazar (talk) 05:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment As this article hasn't been developed with further sources for some time, is this still deemed to be worth maintaining as an article in its own right, or should it be merged with another article? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:47, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Support XAKxRUSx I don't see a need for this article at all, since it 1) Has only one sources, which isn't very reliable 2) Very biased (because of the one source) — Preceding undated comment added 19:56, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Support I agree with the nominator. This article is a slightly biased stub with only one source. --Reawaken (talk) 04:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Support - One source with unsupported credentials? I don't actually see anything other than an "according to" qualification if it's deemed to be worthy of merging. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 07:07, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note that I've added additional references demonstrating that the incident was reported by a number of other RS news services, but the details are not clear, and it certainly doesn't meet WP:GNG. It definitely needs to be parred down and merged into 2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine. I can see why Fitzcarmalan might prefer merging into the 2014 Crimean crisis article, but I see it as a stand-out for the original proposal. It doesn't fit into the parameters of the Crimean crisis in terms of the timeline or the nature of the shooting. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:09, 9 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak Oppose - notable incident but it is a little biased. Nevertheless i don't think this should be deleted or merged--Arbutus the tree (talk) 15:00, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Novofedorivka shootout?
How did this new article WP:TITLE come about? How does the article even meet WP:GNG? The proposal for a merger was already made. Why does this article even exist independent of its context? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:45, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * This should be merged to 2014 Crimean crisis (in an "aftermath" like section). I've reverted the title change (it was quite bizarre indeed). Given the present state of 2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine, I do not think that a merger there is appropriate. RGloucester  — ☎ 17:49, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed that the Crimean crisis article is the most appropriate merge. The reportage was patchy and contradictory, and there's been no new coverage of the incident since that time (that I'm aware of, or have been able to find). There are too many of these WP:RECENTISM incidents based on WP:CRYSTAL as meeting WP:GNG floating around. If there is a follow up on investigations at some later date, it may meet the criteria and be developed if/when appropriate. For the moment, it falls under WP:NOTNEWS. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:59, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * There was broad support above, so I don't see why it can't be done. RGloucester  — ☎ 04:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Then it should be done! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 06:03, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 05 September 2014
Novofedorivka incident → 2014 Novofedorivka shootout – More correct name. NickSt (talk) 13:15, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.


 * Support, although I'm open to suggestions on whether the title should end in "shootout", "incident" or something else. - Anonimski (talk) 16:21, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose – New title doesn't make any sense. Regardless, this page will be merged shortly, so this request is frivolous. See above consensus. RGloucester  — ☎ 16:24, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose per the policies and guidelines under which I was compelled to add the section above. How does "shootout" apply? Whatever changes are applied to the title are irrelevant. It doesn't meet WP:GNG. The fact is that it is simply part of a greater series of events and belongs in the Crimea article. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:55, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Remaking the Article
I would like to recreate this article because personally I think this is good information for Wikipedia. This article contains valuable information about the crisis in Crimea. I would like to see this article recreated immediately. I am open to messages regarding this article. Thank You, --Babestress (talk) 16:31, 10 February 2015 (UTC)Babestress
 * It cannot be remade, it was merged by community discussion. Please cease and desist. RGloucester  — ☎ 17:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC)