Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 Sydney suicide attack


 * 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 Terrorism in Australia. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 07:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

2009 Sydney suicide attack

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article previously proposed for deletion, and there's a little uncertainty about WP:NOT. I'll express my own opinions below. Andjam (talk) 11:38, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep terrorism, even unsuccessful attempts, has a significant impact in Australia. They are the subject of significant ongoing media coverage, from the initial raids to the court cases, something that cannot be covered in a single Wikinews article. Andjam (talk) 12:15, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, these are allegations and whole text of the article is "Three people in Sydney, Australia, have been charged with attempting to launch a suicide attack on an army base." Title is grotesquely misleading. Also, by WP:CRYSTALBALL, articles are not kept because they will become notable someday. Abductive  (reasoning) 12:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "Suicide bombing" has become a common term as it is less controversial than "terrorist attack". It may be that the person who titled it decided that "Suicide attack" would be a good way to avoid the phrase "terrorist plot" (though they should have phrased it more carefully as the attack didn't happen). I don't see how crystal balling comes into it. The arrests have been made - if it turns out that there wasn't an attack planned, then it changes from a notable attack attempt into an even more notable abuse of power by the government. Andjam (talk) 13:20, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The title is imaginative, it is not a current event as it never occurred and the allegations haven't been proven yet. Wikipedia shouldn't get involved in the anti-muslim scare campaign that has replaced Cold War rhetoric since 9/11. There was significant media coverage about Molly, the dog lost for 10 years and a school girl's absentee note that was written by Barack Obama, but we don't have articles for those.- Shiftchange (talk) 12:53, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Please try to assume good faith. The title needs fixing, but the body of the article sticks to the facts and cites the BBC, not tabloid media. Andjam (talk) 13:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: They were charged with it. Fails WP:NOT. Joe Chill (talk) 13:18, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The individuals charged with the plot are entitled to the presumption of innocence, but notability is ensured regardless of whether an attack was planned or not. Mohamed Haneef, who was wrongfully arrested, has a high quality article with 86 references in it. If this group was innocent, it'll be even more notable than if they were guilty. Andjam (talk) 13:33, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment article has been renamed to 2009 alleged Sydney shooting plot. Andjam (talk) 13:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No content, no context, WP:NOT, WP:RECENTISM. — Rankiri (talk) 14:47, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  —Grahame (talk) 14:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I have no particular opinion but I have some comments and quotes. This says it was "the result of a seven-month surveillance operation" and that "the mass counter-terrorism operation" was "the second-largest ever in Australia". This says "Australia has suffered few terrorist incidents on its soil, the best known being a 1978 bomb attack outside a Sydney hotel hosting a Commonwealth meeting, which killed two people". It has also been said, according to this, that (if successful) it would be "the most serious terrorist attack on Australian soil". The last bit is opinion but the fact is it has been said all the same even if proven to be false at a later date. That in itself would have consequences. --  can  dle &bull; wicke  15:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:NOT. If information is later released showing this went far enough beyond the talking stage, a less amorphous article can be written. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:37, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Now that the title has been moved to include the words "alleged" and "plot", this barely even qualifies as news, let alone notability. I'm glad that there was no attack and that this was foiled before it happened, and perhaps it should be mentioned in the article about the police who stopped this from becoming a 2009 Sydney suicide attack. Mandsford (talk) 16:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to Terrorism in Australia. --Shuki (talk) 20:11, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to Terrorism in Australia for the present. An article can be developed separately in the future if needed.  florrie  23:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:NOTNEWS. WWGB (talk) 13:23, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. yousaf465
 * Merge to Terrorism in Australia Garrie 13:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. This is now duplicated in Holsworthy Barracks terror plot, which probably should also be merged or deleted.--Grahame (talk) 07:06, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to Terrorism in Australia for now, per above. There are no concrete details yet other than sensationalist speculation by the press, lets wait until we have some details before writing an article.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:06, 11 August 2009 (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.