Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baligród massacre


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 00:41, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Baligród massacre

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

42 people killed by a hostile army in a war zone is not notable Taivo (talk) 12:13, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Delete or merge: Even though it's been listed somewhere on a county history or on a monument still doesn't make it notable. It makes it verifiable, but not notable. I am listed in various publications, but that doesn't make me notable--it just makes me verifiable. Wikipedia doesn't give an article to every verifiable fact or event, nor should it. (Taivo (talk) 23:54, 27 January 2010 (UTC))
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions.  --  Beloved  Freak  12:26, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Keep or merge. I don't see how the encyclopedia could be improved by deleting this information. Certainly it needs rewriting; perhaps it could be merged into another article which covers these events more comprehensively.--Kotniski (talk) 13:00, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * A merging of this information at some article like "Massacres in the Poland/Ukraine conflict" would be appropriate, but an individual article on each massacre is inappropriate. When two sentences is all the information that an event can generate, it's too non-notable for a separate article.  The series of strikes and counterstrikes between Poland and Ukraine is notable, but not a separate article for each and every event in that long, sad affair.  (Taivo (talk) 13:07, 28 January 2010 (UTC))


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions.  -- (Taivo (talk) 13:19, 28 January 2010 (UTC))
 * Keep - mass (not serial) murders of civilians have been kept in the past. If sourceable, this should be kept as notable.  One murder is a tragedy, 42 murders is a horror. Bearian (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Your links don't go to any examples. 42 civilian deaths would be notable if it was not in a war zone during wartime.  That's the problem.  This isn't something happening in peaceful Nebraska, but between two groups of people fighting it out in a war zone.  You've got to get your perspective right here.  Write an article on Polish/Ukrainian massacres and include all of them there.  That's notable.  This is still not notable because it happened in a war zone.  (Taivo (talk) 02:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC))


 * Keep The proper way of handling Polish/Ukrainian massacres of this magnitude is to include an article on each of them, just as elsewhere. I do not see that being in a war zone has ever been formally proposed as a reason for not having an article. I can see the common sense of not having every individual death, or even small incident, unless there were some special feature or extensive coverage, but I do not see any rationale why a massacre of civilians in one place or time is less notable than in another. This has been claimed as a policy before:, but I can find no such standard practice. Nor do I think there ought to be.    DGG ( talk ) 05:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you name another example besides the Polish/Ukrainian one where every single small massacre has been listed individually? This is akin to listing every individual city where Germans rounded up Jews as a separate article.  It was a series, a cycle of violence.  As a series, it is notable.  Each individual action in that series is not notable.  42 people killed in wartime in a war zone is not "this magnitude".  Do we list every single bombing action over Germany separately with the number of civilian casualties listed for each day and each target?  No.  WWII was a war.  Civilians get killed in wars.  Thousands of Jews were killed in Rivne when the Germans came in.  Is there a separate article for that?  No.  It is of a far greater magnitude than the regrettable 42 deaths in Baligród, so why are you claiming that Baligród is worse than each individual city that was purged of hundreds and thousands of people by the Germans or each individual city that was bombed on each day it was bombed?  You have to keep your perspective.  (Taivo (talk) 13:11, 29 January 2010 (UTC))


 * Keep per Kotniski, Bearian, DDG. Writegeist (talk) 02:00, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: I agree per Kotniski, Bearian, DGG. - Ret.Prof (talk) 04:00, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Article barely longer than reference at Baligród It is ridiculous to have an article that is not really longer than the mention of the event at the main city article. It seems to be more POV pushing to have a separate article that contains two sentences rather than simply incorporate those two sentences into the article at Baligród.  No evidence has been presented to justify this article's separate existence.  (Taivo (talk) 00:42, 30 January 2010 (UTC))
 * I disagree. This stub will grow. - Ret.Prof (talk) 04:04, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * How will this stub grow? Nothing else happened there.  Are you going to list all 42 names?  The Ukrainians entered the town and killed people in a single event.  There's nothing to grow there.  It didn't happen over an extended time.  The only things that would make this longer would be a listing of how every Ukrainian killed every Pole.  Now you're really talking NOT NOTABLE.  (Taivo (talk) 05:13, 30 January 2010 (UTC))


 * Keep, presuming some historical discussion of the massacre has taken place. It's hard to imagine why a historically documented massacre would not be considered notable. Everyking (talk) 07:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * So will you support a separate article for each and every bombing raid over Germany during WWII in which civilians were killed? Will you support a separate article for each and every German killing a Jew?  That's what you're promoting here.  This single incident is not notable.  It is part of a notable series, but 42 people killed in a war zone by a hostile army just isn't notable.  People get killed by hostile armies in wartime.  There is no visible perspective in these comments.  (Taivo (talk) 07:18, 31 January 2010 (UTC))


 * Like I said&mdash;presuming there's historical discussion. An air raid should be considered notable if it's been discussed as a separate event. I don't agree with the philosophy of discounting the importance of events because they occurred during a war. Everyking (talk) 07:26, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see where this has been discussed as a separate historical event (your criterion). The link in the references doesn't go anywhere, so I can only assume that it's bogus.  The only other reference is to a work that covers the entire Polish-Ukrainian conflict.  That's been my point all along--this deserves to be mentioned in an article that covers the conflict as a whole, but two sentences is not notable enough for a separate article.  (Taivo (talk) 20:38, 31 January 2010 (UTC))
 * If you think that these two sentences about Balogród are actually notable, then I suggest you look at this, which takes nothing and turns it into much more than you can ever write for the Baligród massacre. Notability of wartime incidents is entirely based on utilizing proper perspective.  42 dead soldiers doesn't make a notable "battle" any more than 42 dead civilians makes a notable "massacre".  (Taivo (talk) 20:46, 31 January 2010 (UTC))


 * Keep If this were 42 civilians became collateral damage in a war zone, then this would not be notable, but it is 42 civilians deliberately rounded up and killed. Edward321 (talk) 15:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * So, once again, I call for perspective. Are we going to have a separate article for each time that the Germans "deliberately rounded up and killed" Jews in every town?  One article for Rivne, one article for Zdolbuniv, one article for Uzhhorod, one article for Chop, etc.?  There is nothing at all unique about the massacre at Baligród.  It was part of a series of attacks and counterattacks by Poles and Ukrainians.  This article contains not much more than two sentences.  It will never contain more.  That's not notable.  (Taivo (talk) 16:27, 3 February 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.