Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casualties of the 2004 March 11 Madrid 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 of the debate was no consensus. —Cleared as filed. 03:36, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Casualties of the 2004 March 11 Madrid bombings
Tragic, but being killed in this violent way does make the individuals notable. -- RHaworth 08:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a memorial. I recall 9/11 deaths getting deleted, too; that should serve as precedent. '  09:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Bombings are not unusual, and certainly not usually notable.→  P . Mac Uidhir  (t)  (c)  09:09, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting the 11 March 2004 Madrid train bombings, as a whole, are non notable? CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 09:31, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete A link to an external memorial could be placed on the Madrid bombings page, if required. A WP memorial page is not a useful reference item. -- (aeropagitica) [[Image:Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg|25px|UK]] 09:25, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia not a memorial, and BTW the 9/11 Memorial Wikipedia should be taken down, or at least renamed so it's not called a Wikipedia. Blackcats 10:41, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It's called the 9/11 memorial wiki. And since it is a wiki, its name is fine. It is not called Wikipedia to begin with. - Mgm|(talk) 13:40, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That's not quite true. The url is sep11.wikipedia.org, and at the upper left corner it has the "Wikipedia the free encyclopedia" logo.  Blackcats 20:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Looking at it, I'd say it is most definitely a part of Wikipedia. Qarnos 22:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, not memorial. Pavel Vozenilek 11:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per 9/11 precedent. - Mgm|(talk) 13:40, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Whats 9/11 got to do with it? Why does the European event have to bow down to an american one? Jcuk 17:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It's got nothing to do with 9/11 happening in America. It just happened to be a very well-known and larger terrorist attack. If we have a separate wiki for those victims (all 2000-3000 of them), I don't see why we should mention the victims of the Madrid bombings in Wikipedia. - Mgm|(talk) 22:12, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipedia is not a memorial, as above. Ajwebb 22:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I found it useful when checking to see if any if my Spanish aquaintances had died
 * Keep; I am the person who made this article. I just want to explain why I think the English Wikipedia should have such an article. However, of course, if you think that this page should be deleted, go on. (Interested people can check this information in the Spanish version, if they understand Spanish.)
 * 1) Most people argues that "Wikipedia is not a memorial". Well, this article should not be considered as a memorial page, but as a page with additional information about the Madrid bombings. If you consider that the names of the people who died in Madrid are not relevant for Wikipedia, you can delete these names, but at least keep the information about the victims (for instance, why does usually appear the name of Francisco Javier Torrenteras between the people who died, although he did not die in the bombings; or why at first officially the media spoke about 202 casualties, instead of the real number, 190; or the fact that died people of 17 nationalities... etc). If this page is deleted, I think that this information should be added to the Madrid bombings article, but, in order not to excede the amount of information that appears there, I think that the better solution is a page about the persons who dead there. I understand that, as the names of the victims takes up most of the article, many people could think that it is a memorial, but if you read it, you will see that there is more information (that has to be emproved and expanded, I know).
 * 2) Before I made this article, I saw that someone (I don't know who), added in the Madrid bombings article, in the "See also" section, this hidden line:   (as you can see in this edition of an old version of the article), claiming for such an article.
 * 3) P.MacUidhir argues that "Bombings are not unusual, and certainly not usually notable". I agree, bombings are not notable. But not all bombings are the same! Sadly, ETA is responsible for most bombings in Spain, but the Madrid March 11 bombings were not at all usual. It was the worse Al-Qaida attack in Europe. There died almost four times more people than in the 7 July London bombings. Millions of persons took part in the demonstrations against terrorism the day after (more or less the 28% of the Spanish population). Many poeple think that there was a political change in Spain because of these bombings (they happened three days before the March 14 general elections), and that the authors aimed this change; other people think that the former goverment lied supporting that ETA was the author of the attacks until the last moment, as they could lose the elections because of their support to the Bush' invasion of Iraq (it is still a very hot subject, and I don't want to give my opinion here, I just speak about the opinion of many people). I only want to say that obviously the Madrid bombings are, sadly, once again, a historical event, not only in Spain, but worldwide, such as the London bombings, the 9/11 or the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. I am not speaking in this point about the number of persons who died, but just about the importance and consequences of the event.
 * 4) I saw that there was an article about the casualties of the 7 July 2005 London bombings, with the names of all the victims, and I thought that there should be an equivalent article with the Madrid victims. I don't want to think that nationalism should be so important in Wikipedia (when we speak about worldwide events), and the terrorism victims in England should not be more or less important than those who died in Spain. I saw too that there is an article about the London victims in the Spanish wikipedia, without the names (in my opinion this article lacks those names). Nevertheless, in the 9/11 died thousands of men and women, and I think that it is better there an external link, not because those persons were less important, but just because it would be too large; but maybe some persons who died in the 9/11 should appear in wikipedia (the many firefighters who died there? People who saved other people? For instance, William Rodríguez became famous, but he didn't die there). I think that the queston is not as simple as "there should appear all victims of terrorist attacks or none of them".
 * 5) I made the article, as every article, thinking about it as a starting point. So, it should be extended and improved by other wikipedians. For example (as in the July London attacks), who died in each place (the Atocha Station, or El Pozo, or Santa Eugenia, or the Téllez Street)? How many? Where were first carried? What does Pilar Manjón (president of the Association for the victims of 11-M) think about the political reactions? These questions maybe could be too much for the principal article, but not for an article about victims, and it could contain interesting information for wikipedia. I think that there should be a page of the same quality as that one about the London attacks, and I hope that it will be so. I only contribute with my knowledge. I don't know many things about the London attacks, so I can't speak about them.


 * Well, thank you, principally if you had enough patience to read till here! Eynar Oxartum 03:36, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - Are there first-class and second-class victims? Does it depend on the language the victims spoke? If Casualties_of_the_7_July_2005_London_bombings was not deleted (see Votes_for_deletion/Casualties_of_the_7_July_2005_London_bombings), I can't see any valid reason to delete this one. --Ecemaml 16:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

''This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks! '' --Ichiro 08:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, for Ecemaml and Eynar's well stated reasons. GRuban 19:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom.  TestPilot  04:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Looks notable enough to me.  I wouldn't expect to find this in a printed encyclopaedia, but that would be more down to space restrictions than anything imo.  [[Image:Yemen flag large.png|24px]] CTOAGN (talk) 12:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. This has nothing to do with memorials. -- JJay 09:52, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a memorial, even for an event as tragic as this. Sliggy 11:08, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, part of a major event. I'm not sure how useful the list of the names is, but deleting that wouldn't require deleting the whole article. And it doesn't provide redlinks for each of the names which is a plus. - Bobet 12:58, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete . Primarily a list of non-notable dead people (which sounds a lot like a memorial to me) and some information which, unlike with the similar London bombings article, we already have in other articles related to the Madrid bombings (if I missed something and we don't, merge it).--Last Malthusian 13:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * On re-reading the article's actual content, keep the article but the list/memorial/whatever you want to call it should be deleted. Keeping it would lead us to assume that you can't have a list of victims if the death toll is too small to be 'notable', and you can't have it if it's too big to include without disrupting the article. That would be bizarre logic to say the least. --Last Malthusian 17:41, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per the precedent cited by Ecemaml, however I strongly recommend that a policy be developed to create a criteria for this sort of thing otherwise anytime an event like this happens -- major or minor -- someone will want to do a list article. IMO this type of list should only be created for the most major of these events (and Madrid qualifies). But it could get out of hand if someone wants to create an article everytime a car bomb blows up in Baghdad. 23skidoo 15:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep This article isn't about the individuals. It is an excellent part of the coverage of the event. Bhoeble 16:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - useful information --File Éireann 18:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * keep as per Eynal and Ecemaml. Cchan199206 20:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as per 3 comments immediately above. --kingboyk 17:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Eynar Werdna648T/C\@ 07:21, 9 January 2006 (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.