Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/April 2015 New York City pressure cooker bomb plot


 * 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 List of unsuccessful terrorist plots in the United States post-9/11.  Sandstein  12:29, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

April 2015 New York City pressure cooker bomb plot

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NOTNEWS. Nothing about this article indicates it is any different from the foiled terrorist plots mentioned in the List of unsuccessful terrorist plots in the United States post-9/11 article. An attack hasn't even been attempted in this case. This country has also seen many other cases of female Islamic extremists, so that angle wouldn't make this noteworthy either. If deleted, any relevant information from this article can be moved to that one, because it does need mentioning there. Love of Corey (talk) 21:27, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:54, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:54, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:54, 23 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep That incident seems to be significant because of tentative connections with international terrorist organizations. As page tells, "Siddiqui was in contact with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, while Velentzas seemed to support the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS)", and this is sourced. My very best wishes (talk) 17:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
 * All other foiled terrorist plots have a connection to terror organizations or otherwise motivated by support. Do every one of them have articles? No. That's not a particularly standout fact. Love of Corey (talk) 09:51, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * For some reason I do not see it included to the List of unsuccessful terrorist plots in the United States post-9/11. I do agree that not all terrorist plots are notable. However, those linked to famous international organizations (like ISIS or Al Qaeda) and covered in multiple RS I think are all notable enough to deserve a separate page. My very best wishes (talk) 17:49, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hence why I said anything relevant can be merged to that article. And this article doesn't have a lot of RS to support notability like you say. Love of Corey (talk) 19:36, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 21:42, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of unsuccessful terrorist plots in the United States post-9/11. Not notable to have its own standalone article. Natg 19 (talk) 22:44, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree because this story continued for 5 years, it was widely covered in press, and it resulted in convictions in 2020 . And BTW, I would like this to be closed by an administrator, unlike . My very best wishes (talk) 20:47, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you have evidence that "this story continued for 5 years"? Even though the women were not sentenced until 2020, that does not prove that this incident was significant or noteworthy. Natg 19 (talk) 00:53, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This is really a lot of books, and a lot of news covering a period of time from 2015 to 2020. If this is not a  notable case, I do not know what is. My very best wishes (talk) 02:46, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I see that there are general news reports of their conviction, their guilty plea and their sentencing. The books show passing mentions. I'm not seeing significant coverage or enduring notability of the bomb plot. Natg 19 (talk) 00:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This is not a passing mention in books. See here, here, etc. Books consider this as an important case, and dedicate sub-chapters to it. Enduring significance? Yes, the sources cover last 5 years, and given the multiple publications in books, this is apparently a historical case. My very best wishes (talk) 15:32, 3 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - Seems like lasting significance is there. Just a few months ago there was another round of coverage after her sentencing: ABC News, NY Times, NBC New York, AP, CNN... &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 02:33, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Only after five years or so of no coverage. I wouldn't exactly call that long-lasting coverage. More like the "Where are they now?" kind of coverage. Love of Corey (talk) 19:29, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 06:38, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to the merge target mentioned above. There's only trivial coverage of the actual bomb plot. Which is what the article is about. If the the lady who was involved in it is still getting coverage for things related to her make an article about her then and mention the plot there, but her sentencing is no longer about the event of the plot itself that the article is about IMO. Plus, the article kind of goes against the single event rule anyway. Especially since it was just a plot, that never led to anything, and didnt have an aftermath (like an actual bombing would). Adamant1 (talk) 12:47, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge per notnews: if all the coverage of a criminal is directly tied to one or two key moments (the immediate aftermath of the crime, major steps in the legal process) that's a clear sign that it's just routine news coverage. --JBL (talk) 01:51, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of unsuccessful terrorist plots in the United States post-9/11. From WP:EVENTCRITERIA: Editors should bear in mind recentism, the tendency for new and current matters to seem more important than they might seem in a few years time. Many events receive coverage in the news and yet are not of historic or lasting importance. News organizations have criteria for content, i.e. news values, that differ from the criteria used by Wikipedia and encyclopedias generally. A violent crime, accidental death, or other media events may be interesting enough to reporters and news editors to justify coverage, but this will not always translate into sufficient notability for a Wikipedia article. — Rutebega ( talk ) 23:31, 14 June 2020 (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.