Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/12 September 2008 Dujail bombing


 * 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. I'll losely base this on my close at Articles for deletion/August 2010 West Bank shooting (2nd nomination) but in this one the "keep" arguments are just a little but stronger. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

12 September 2008 Dujail bombing

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails WP:NOTNEWS as there is no indication of any "enduring notability" and should be Deleted Codf1977 (talk) 09:40, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep this seems notable to me. Plenty of news sources out there on it.  --E♴ (talk) 14:24, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It was undoutadly covered at the time as a news story, but I am unable to find any reports that demonstrate "enduring notability" as per NOTNEWS, which is the reason for the nom. Codf1977 (talk) 14:32, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete as Wikipedia is not the news. There is no evidence of lasting impact. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  17:35, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:20, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:20, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. NOT NEWS. Jimmy Pitt   talk  22:43, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. —Carrite, Sept. 24, 2010.
 * Keep. Not routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities for which NOTNEWS was intended. This is also a classic example of WP:BIAS. A similar incident (with 28 deaths) in a Western country would not for a second be nominated for deletion.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 23:53, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Brewcrewer. Arguments for deletion above are based on a misapplication or misunderstanding of NOTNEWS which in intended to scene out articles on routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities.  Politically-motivated attacks by armed gunmen who are part of a large, organized campaign of political violence are not routine news.  A WP:CONS has evolved under which individual acts of political terrorism are considered WP:Notable. This attack qualifies for Wikipedia under Notability (events) because it received extensive international coverage..  Moreover the attempt to delete this article, but not articles on similar events in Europe and the United States reeks of Systemic bias.   Surely we do not accept the implication that life is cheaper in the Middle East.   Finally, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia.   "Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, which means that there is no practical limit to the number of topics we can cover or the total amount of content. ... A rule of thumb for creating a Wikipedia article is ... the scope of reporting (national or global reporting is preferred). ... Events are ... very likely to be notable if they have widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources..."AMuseo (talk) 15:11, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with the WP:BIAS argument - it is just a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, in this case there is no indication what so ever that this, news story any "enduring notability, the article has only one ref from the BBC written on the day of this attack. WP has a clear policy on this and for all your words you have not provided anything that shows this has any "enduring notability. Codf1977 (talk) 15:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep life is not cheaper in the middle east. classic WP:BIAS situation and people dont even seem to realize it.  show me evidence of one incident in the "West" where 28 people died and the article on it was deleted per WP:NOTNEWS and I will gladly change my !vote.--Wikireader41 (talk) 16:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No bias, I see that you have been updating the article, but you seem not to be able to find any coverage from anything other than the day - I will gladley withdraw the nom if you can provide any significant coverage in reliable sources from anything other than the 24 hours after the event, faling that there is zero indication of lasting significance, just another crime story.Codf1977 (talk) 16:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No need to withdraw. I think we can all predict how this AfD will close now.  Cheers.--Wikireader41 (talk) 16:40, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep seems properly sourced, maybe someone could make an entry for it on List of terrorist incidents, 2008 since it is linked to there. WookieInHeat (talk) 01:59, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.