Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of 12 newborn babies in Banja Luka


 * 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   delete. Spartaz Humbug! 13:19, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Death of 12 newborn babies in Banja Luka

 * – ( View AfD View log )


 * Delete Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Contested PROD: "This is very known incident" ->, and with three sources does not appear to be a "very known incident" (I didn't hear about it anyway). Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  21:48, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong keep As I said, this is very known incident during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. There is a monument in Banja Luka (capital sity of Republic of Srpska) build by the goverment and dedicated to 12 babies.1. And 22nd of May was declared as the day of twelve babies in Republic of Srpska.2. There is also a street near the clinical center with the name "Twelve babies".2-- В и к и в и н д  T a L k   22:09, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is not news. It is historical event. This event was one episode in Bosnian war and was catalyst for operation Corridor. It isn't our fault that foreign press didn't mention it. -- Bojan   Talk  02:11, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bosnia-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 02:38, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 02:38, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete, per Wiki not a newspaper. Wiki should not be a place for Serbian propaganda, nor any propaganda at all. Milorad Dodik every year pays a lot of money for such activites. ICTY is a place where Serbian propaganda was sentenced to eternal shame, due to the fact it was part of the strategy of Serbian leadership according to the findings by ICTY in Yugoslav wars. BokicaK said: "the episode was catalyst for operation Corridor". This is all wrong. According to the verdict to Serbian war criminal, Simić (case IT-95-9), Operation Corridor was one of many operations of ethnic cleansing of non-Serb population. Now, these anonymous users, are writting articles in order to help war ciminals in ICTY, making fake execuses for their crimes. Wiki should not be part of that. Alan.Ford.Jn (talk) 11:42, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * This event happened. Your personal opinion leave for yourself. -- Bojan   Talk  13:05, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * And here are sources from ICTY   -- Bojan   Talk   13:42, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. The article has an overwhelming whiff of propaganda.  I fear that there is nothing that is salvageable from this article. It appears to be full of weasel language.  As this event occurred during a civil war, I think independent sources can only really be found from an international perspective. The lack of recognisable international sources makes this story next to impossible to verify.


 * Whilst I'm not suggesting it didn't happen. If we remove the unreferenced material (and we are generous), we are left with a stub which suggests nothing more than 12 babies died in a hospital in 1992 because of a lack of oxygen (and that includes even if we add the material from ICTY justed posted by User:BokicaK). Pit-yacker (talk) 13:55, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Babies died due to lack of oxygen, that is not something that happens every day, even in wars. Those who survived have/had awful life. Shortage of oxygen (and other goods) came due to cutting land links to Serbia and due to no-fly zone over Bosnia. Babies are not exclusively Serbs, article never said something like that (first version of article had list of their mothers, so people from Balkans can easily guess what nationality mothers were). The event was catalyst/trigger for subsequent military operation. -- Bojan   Talk  14:24, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not seeing anyone suggesting the babies were exclusively Serbian. From the point of view of a Wikipedia article, it doesn't matter either way provided any claim (particularly controversial ones) can be verified by reliable sources.
 * And that is the problem at the moment. Practically the only thing we have any reference for (and that any can be found for) is that 12 babies died. Virtually every other assertion put forward is completely unverifiable at this stage.
 * When I say that, I'll go as far as ignoring the apparent constant use of weasel language, and logical gaps which suggest we aren't hearing the full neutral story. The problem is that fundamentally, if it is unverifiable it doesn't matter if the article is neutral or not because without independent verifiable sources the unreferenced material cannot be fixed. Pit-yacker (talk) 14:54, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * See AlanFord's comment which I understand as inflammatory with tendency to potray us like animals that have no human feelings. -- Bojan   Talk  15:11, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. I would like to ask nicely some users here not to talk about "Serbian propaganda" on Wikipedia, while they themselves spread Muslim propaganda, especially if their history if full of such. This is something that really happened, and this is a fact. This is NOT a newspaper news, this is history. Therfore, it is a historical fact, ans as a such, it cannot be deleted. If someone haven't heard of it, it is not Wikipedia's problem, it is his problem and he should work a little bit more on informing himself. And of course, it is NOT an argument at all, is it? :) If someone thinks it is POV, then clean it. But you cannot delete it. The fact is that the babies died, and the fact is that they died due to the lack of oxygen that couldn't be administered to them because of the war. There's nothing in this that could be tagged as propaganda. --Maduixa (talk) 14:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: ...and historical events are generally considered "facts" because they are written about by numerous sources. That even happened in ancient Rome. Provide some reliable sources to back up the claims made (particularly in the "Background" section) and you have yourself an article where NPOV issues might be fixable.  Until then you have little beyond the title of the article. Pit-yacker (talk) 15:07, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. There will always be those who deny the reality of suffering. Government of the Republic of Srpska: Nineteenth Anniversary of 12 Babies’ Death Commemorated --Bas-Celik (talk) 16:41, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - if by any chance the consensus is that it doesn't meet the threshold of notability for a standalone article, this content should still be merged into Propaganda in the Yugoslav Wars because it was apparently used for that, continuing to the present day - an anonymous user has been persistently whitewashing Operation Corridor recently, claiming it was all done to save the dying babies. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 22:26, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - I agree with Pit-yacker. The article in its current state is little more than an overblown stub. Whether something is a historic event or not depends on the sources covering it and as far as I can tell this event had very limited non-local coverage. Without going into the whole matter of the event possibly being (ab)used by historical revisionists, the fact of the matter is that unless it can be proven that it is notable enough via reliable sources we have no reason to think that this meets our GNG threshold. And currently the article has three references - one is offline and the other two are short newspaper articles about the death of Slađana Kobas, the only surviving baby. Seems pretty thin.  Timbouctou ( talk ) 23:16, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete This looks like a newspaper article. RomeEonBmbo (talk) 01:52, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. So far, the references in the article do not indicate the sort of (non-local) media coverage normally required for notability. This sort of event is more suited for coverage in the article about the corresponding city, war or battle.  Sandstein   07:32, 4 September 2011 (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.