Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 Tel Aviv gay centre shooting spree


 * 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The result was keep, nom withdrawn. NAC. Cliff smith talk  16:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

2009 Tel Aviv gay centre shooting spree

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

Delete Wiki is not a current event site. Nor is it a News Site Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:22, 2 August 2009 (UTC) Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:22, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  — Cliff smith  talk  16:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep, you did this less than five minutes after I began and edit-conflicted me in the process... -- can  dle &bull; wicke  13:30, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok so if I waited five more minutes this wouldn't be a current event? The source is from today? How is that inline with Wikipedia is not a newspaper? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:34, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, you could have allowed it to develop for a little longer than five minutes... "current events" aren't forbidden on Wikipedia. There's an entire section on the Main Page not to mention an entire portal. --  can  dle &bull; wicke  13:39, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * perhaps you should read the link I sent. You are writing a news article nothing more. We are not journalists. see also WikiNews. You are writing about the reactions and such as if you are reporting the news. That isn't allowed per my understanding of the policies. If perhaps you can show me an the policy that allows the entry I'd be happy to reconsider. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Kepp and develop, let the dust settle before considering the longevity and encyclopedic meaning of this event. rkmlai (talk) 13:53, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats precisly my reasoning in NOT having the article on the attacks yet. Right now it's only reactions we don't know anything, I think it best to wait and see if it has an impact and how.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:58, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It has already united supporters and critics alike. -- can  dle &bull; wicke  14:00, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Great, I'm not suggesting it isn't sad just that thios is a news article and based on peoples opinions nothing more. It's a newspaper article not in anyway encyclopeadic. I'm sorry and do not mean to disparage your work but this is how ZI feel and understand Wiki policies.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's fine, I respect your opinion. [[File:Smile.png]] However, my view is that this is being reported around the world (as is typical of these shootings), has drawn commentary from all sides, killed and wounded enough people to compare to other articles Wikipedia has... I just hadn't the time to develop it before you nominated it. I had already nominated it for the Main Page so it may even appear there in future. -- can  dle &bull; wicke  14:23, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

_Withdraw Nom. While I still conside unencylopeadic and anews article this is clearly a wp:snow case. I stand by my point that Wiki is not a news site and article is un-needed at this point. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems like a notable incident. J I P  | Talk 14:07, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. These things don't come around very often. Cargoking   talk  15:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't see a reason to delete this. TouLouse (talk) 15:44, 2 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.