Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/28 September 2008 Baghdad bombings


 * 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   no consensus per my rationale at Articles for deletion/August 2010 West Bank shooting (2nd nomination) Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:15, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

28 September 2008 Baghdad bombings

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails WP:NOTNEWS as there is no indication of any "enduring notability and should be Deleted Codf1977 (talk) 09:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as Wikipedia is not a news. There is no evidence of lasting impact. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  17:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 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 32 deaths) in a Western country would not for a second be nominated for deletion.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 23:52, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep 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) 15:10, 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 no ref's at all and the only link is to a BBC news page written BEFORE the date 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) 15:17, 26 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep per Amuseo.  significant event. agree with WP:BIAS argument.  such an event in a western city (NY,London,paris) would never have been nominated--Wikireader41 (talk) 21:23, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Per Nom, Not News. Yet if this was a single incident, it would get massive amount of coverage, yet it just another in a series of incidents in an ongoing war. Not every single skirmish during WW2 would have an article, so this shouldn't either.--Jojhutton (talk) 15:53, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete "article" is one paragraph and one source, hardly even qualifies for stub status. WookieInHeat (talk) 01:46, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge if it's not expanded. A series of incidents where 32 people get blown up is inherently notable, and it's not even necessary to point out the absurdity of comparing this to "announcements, sports and celebrities". Ideally, "every single skirmish during WWII" should also be covered by Wikipedia, either as standalone articles or collectively in groups. Wookie's argument is directly contrary to WP:DEMOLISH, and even if accepted it's an argument to merge, not to delete. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 02:05, 1 October 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.