Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coat of arms of the State of Palestine


 * 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, at least in a technical AfD-closure sense. In fact, there is a rough consensus that this content should not be in a separate article with this title. Unfortunately there is no consensus about what to do with it. There is little support for outright deletion. There is substantial and well-argued support for a redirect, but I cannot say there is consensus on what the redirect target should be. Taking into account the third and fourth paragraphs of WP:RELIST, I cannot relist this debate for a fourth time and feel that "no consensus" is the only close available. However, in this case I think that consensus is achievable in time and I suggest that discussion should continue on the relevant talk pages about the possible redirect target. If no discussion ensues within a week or so, then I would think that a redirect may be unilaterally implemented per WP:BRD. Whether or not a consensus is reached, would the participants please have regard to Emmette Hernandez Coleman's point about copying within Wikipedia, which needs to be taken very seriously because of our terms of use. Please ensure that we remain compliant by using one of the techniques described at Copying within Wikipedia. NAC— S Marshall T/C 12:42, 1 February 2013 (UTC)'''

Coat of arms of the State of Palestine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Duplicate of Coat of arms of the Palestinian National Authority Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 23:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Keep - it is clearly not a duplicate, the first is saying "Sulta Wataniya Falastiniyya" (Palestinian Authority), while the second saying simply "Filastin" (Palestine, i.e. State of Palestine). Since the upgrade of the Palestinian status in the UN, it seems that President Abbas decided to use the "State of Palestine" symbols, rather than PNA.Greyshark09 (talk) 23:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete WP:A10 — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 23:15, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 23:20, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment Here's the version of "Coat of arms of the Palestinian National Authority" at the time of this nomination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk • contribs) 23:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * what is the point of your comment if you just changed the article to fit your POV?Greyshark09 (talk) 12:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It covered both versions of the CoA before ether of us edited it, but it included two paragraphs describing the CoA, which were almost verbatim copies of each other. I removed the second paragraph, and adapted the first paragraph to describe the variation with the Arabic text between the two versions. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 12:24, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment This is a premature creation of an article by an editor who should know by now to at least present the correct links to the state in question (I couldn't find a working one myself). Any deletion of the current article should not prejudice against its recreation with proper references. CarolMooreDC 00:12, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * See the use of Palestine CoA at Palestinian Ministry of Education website .Greyshark09 (talk) 08:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Proper formatting of the link in the article where you just added it, as well as a credible English translation saying "this is the coat of arms", would help. I couldn't get it to work in translate google but might have done it wrong. CarolMooreDC 15:20, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep Not a duplicate. I am amazed at this nomination. (or at least the rationale that it's somehow a duplicate). --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 05:42, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Greysharks's developer it some sense he's nominated it, here's what it looked like during the nomination. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 21:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment It is true that there are two slightly different venations of the Palestinian CoA, the difference being the Arabic text, but as shown by Coat of arms of Romania and Infobox Coat of arms we don't give each version it's own article. Also this article is a recreation of Coat of arms of Palestine which was previously redirected.


 * Also just as a side point when the article was split from Coat of arms of the Palestinian National Authority, there was no credit given to the contributors of that article (per WP:CWW)), so the article is a copyright violation. Not really a reason to delete this because that lack of credit can be fixed, but serous enough to warrant menacing. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 21:38, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * CoA Palestine article was redirected without discussion (in any case it is about Coa State of Palestine).Greyshark09 (talk) 21:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That's not much of an argument, the redirect was never reverted so there was conciseness for that action. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 21:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, lets be fair...niether did you. Seriously, lets look at what your reasoning is thus far. You deleted and redirected the article only becuase there was no discussion. Sorry, but that was edit warring as one need not discuss a a split. They may be done boldly. Your revert was discussed and no consensus was reached. That means the article is returned. But you could not accept that and began further actions, such as this AFD, a Move discussion and a DR/N filing. I also note that your reasoning using the Romanian article and the inforbox are not policy or guidelines and is a very weak argument that is only a comparison and not a reasoning. Lastly, you could easily have fixed the attribution but instead bring it up as yet further reasoning against the article itself. For clarification it is an attribution issue not a clear copyright issue. We are not talking about copying from a source but a lack of attritributing the original article contrinuters that merely requires a template on the talkpage.....that I note has simply not been created yet. I will take that step now and add my opinion on the AFD below.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:53, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * When you say "conciseness" you mean "consensus". Check the translation.Greyshark09 (talk) 22:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep. "No consensus" resulted in the article being returned. The AFD could be seen as an attempt to game the system and do an end run around a lack of consensus. Multiple forums have been attempted by the OP and it is this editor's belief that they compromise with the other editor. The best thing to do, would have been to start just an RFC, which is a little too late now. The editors need to collaborate more and compromise on issues, but this article has no particular reason to be deleted.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:53, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment I recommend that this AFD be closed as no action pending the result of Talk:Coat_of_arms_of_the_Palestinian_National_Authority. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 05:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete, maybe turn into a redirect. Duplicates content of Coat of arms of the Palestinian National Authority. The Editorial Voice (talk) 07:59, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michig (talk) 15:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)




 * Redirect - theoretically this article should deal with CoA of the State of Palestine declared in 1988, but despite the more than 20 years age the content is minimal and already present at the other article. Recent events are also about PNA institutions using the same CoA as the SoP and that's already covered at the other article whose topic is the PNA. Discussion there can be utilized to decide if some further changes are required in the other article content, title, etc. Japinderum (talk) 08:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge Redirect to Coat of arms of the Palestinian National Authority. Palestine does not have so many different coats of arms to justify multiple separate articles.--Staberinde (talk) 18:48, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * There's nothing to merge. The Authority article already covers the State, and the State article doesn't have any content that the Authority article doesn't. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 19:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I have adjusted my vote accordingly. If there is nothing to merge then this should be turned into redirect.--Staberinde (talk) 10:31, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TBrandley (what's up) 15:36, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - Third extensions of deletion debates are supposed to be accompanied by a detailed rationale of why no call has been made. So why has no call been made? Somebody step up... Carrite (talk) 18:41, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect (and then consider whatever page move might be appropriate for the target page, e.g. to Coat of arms of Palestine). There is clearly not enough content for two distinct articles here. And to those editors who are amazed and shocked at the idea: what matters here is not whether the CoA of the "authority" and that of the "state" are theoretically distinct entities in some abstract sense; what matters is that what we factually have to say about them is 99% overlapping. Our definition of article topics is not necessarily meant to reflect abstract classifications and ontologies of things out there, but efficient packaging of information for readers. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:20, 25 January 2013 (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.