Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Attack on Kennedy Road


 * 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. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 19:50, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Attack on Kennedy Road

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

News article (WP:NOTNEWS WP:UNDUE) by a Abahlali baseMjondolo, a fringe political group, that seems to be/have been using Wikipedia for self-promotion/propaganda (WP:COI) and as a gazette, in which events and persons connected to this minor organisation seem to be given undue weight. Unfortunately violence in South Africa is not notable in itself, and rioting was common during the time period in question. By the standards of South African township riots, it seems to have been rather tame, and it fails WP:Notability. Like other Abahlali articles, the formatting of the article is excellent for an article about a South African topic, and it appears to be well-sourced, but that should not impact on the decision to remove it, or merge it Park3r (talk) 09:54, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 10:14, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 10:14, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Nom says it appears to be well sourced and I agree. Szzuk (talk) 13:02, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:38, 2 April 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:43, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Be serious. The sources already in the article are far, far more than sufficient to meet WP:GNG.  Nom's theories on why, despite meeting GNG, this subject is not notable, are interesting, but they're not AfD-worthy reasoning. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:46, 9 April 2018 (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.