Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death and funeral of Ariel Sharon


 * 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. Further work is needed, but consensus is not to delete. Mojo Hand (talk) 16:18, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Death and funeral of Ariel Sharon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article's contents were ejected from the Sharon biography. It has grown, and I feel it is excessively newsy, recentist and filled with too many sound bites. It's also clearly eulogistic, as most of those commenting never saw eye-to-eye with him or thought he was a pain in the backside, yet are caught in the dilemma of not speaking ill of the dead. I see nothing of value here – it can all by replaced with fewer words and less blind rhetoric. I tried redirecting it to the bio, but was reverted. I would propose deleting all the sound bites and reinstating a redirect to the bio containing a prior version of the reactions section that I feel is infinitely more encyclopaedic.  Ohc  ¡digame! 03:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has also been included in the list of politics-related deletion discussions and  list of Israel-related deletion discussions. -- User:Ohconfucius 04:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep but edit liberally. I think this is a legitimate content WP:SPLIT for the sake of readability given the "primary" article is 76k+ and the split is 16k+. Combined they would still be less than 100k but the event probably meets the criteria of WP:EVENT on its own anyway. That said, Ohconfucius is right in that it could do with some pruning and commentary from leaders of Colombia, Fiji, Mexico and Sweden probably isn't necessary. Stick to the countries with notable relationships with Israel. Shame this couldn't be resolved with an RFC or talk page discussion but there's a good chance this would be considered subject to relevant ARBCOM sanctions so bringing it here might very well prove a wise move. Stalwart 111  04:25, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The text I proposed replacing this article with, which includes all the notable and excludes all the rhetoric, is less than 400 words long and weighs 5.5kB, so a merger need not bloat the article, especially as you see the opportunity/need to radically prune. And you are right, I didn't want to start another edit war under Arbcom's noses and get bludgeoned to death by Robocop. Can we not try merging it as suggested, and then split it off again when the volume/quality warrants it? --  Ohc  ¡digame! 04:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, personally I'd be comfortable with your proposed text/language but that's probably a decision for a wider consensus-seeking discussion. I still think a separate article is justified, though, even if it is significantly shorter. I suspect it will eventually grow into a worthwhile article like those listed below. I think its worth shepherding its progress in that direction from the start, rather than merging it back into the primary article only to split it out later anyway. Your attitude with regard to sanctions is sensible. Stalwart 111  04:53, 21 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Probably, the nominator is unaware about similar aspects. It is not necessary that the particular subject should be WP:RECENT. Nominate maybe unaware of Death and funeral of Margaret Thatcher, Death and state funeral of Hugo Chávez, etc. Bladesmulti (talk) 04:30, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying we shouldn't have a so-entitled article, just that the actual valuable (read "encyclopaedic) content can be easily absorbed in the biography. Neither of those articles contains as much recentist and policy-violating cruft as this one. --  Ohc  ¡digame! 04:36, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge with Ariel Sharon. I see there's about a dozen or so similar pages of world leaders' death and funeral. Their existence doesn't prove the need for this page, however. I don't see what is particularly notable or special about the funeral, in that it cannot be included on the main page. Most of this information, however, is trivial and doesn't need to be included, as mentioned above. Also, Sharon's page isn't excessively long. mikeman67 (talk) 04:39, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, maybe merge - I am sure the Queen's funeral will get an article as well and this is a notable person who died. Antonio Ricky Martin (aca) 08:21, February 21, 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, maybe merge Ariel Sharon is long-term historically important person. Hafspajen (talk) 11:37, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * keep Surprisingly, I'm going to side with Bladesmulti on this one. Personally I think that having articles on state funerals at all is unencyclopedic, but I am confident that if I were to put any of the others up for deletion, it would be WP:SNOWing heavily. Therefore I must conclude that we've established a guideline that state funerals are intrinsically notable. Mangoe (talk) 13:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, needs source improvement State funerals of truly notable/legendary, persons, like Sharon (or for example, Nelson Mandela, nothing else than notability level implied here!) are independent hostorical events that warrants their own pages. However, the very first reference, on when Sharon died (ref 1) does NOT mention Ariel Sharon's death at all, but describes his medical condition, since he was still alive at article publication date. Such amateurish reference fallacies must be removed from this article!!!Arildnordby (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2014 (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.