Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guerrilla phase of the Second Chechen War (2009)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Guerrilla phase of the Second Chechen War (2009)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Per WP:SYNTH. Fabricated war. None of these sources mention a "Guerrilla phase" of the Second Chechen war (which is over), or anything about Guerrilla warfare. Moreover, none of this violence is occurring in Chechnya as the title would suggest, and it's completely sporadic and unorganized. LokiiT (talk) 01:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Agreed, this is not a "Guerilla phase of the Second Chechen war." Offliner (talk) 05:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. No, in fact every cited source (and a lot of other sources) describes warfare in Chechnya. This can be either an active war or a Guerrilla warfare. Let me just cite Reuters (a ref from this article):

And so on, and so on... If this is not a Guerrilla warfare, what is it? Biophys (talk) 15:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "No, in fact every cited source (and a lot of other sources) describes warfare in Chechnya." - That's simply not true. None of those articles mention warfare currently taking place in Chechnya (or any other region). Not a single one. They all say the same thing: Violent region/volatile region/violence plagued region etc.. but nothing about warfare. The word "guerrilla" is nowhere to be found in any of those articles, neither is there any mention of a new "phase" of a war that ended years ago. And like I said, the bombing and all those listed attacks didn't even take place in Chechnya. You're grasping at straws and trying to blow it way out of proportion based on your own personal interpretation of what warfare and Guerrilla warfare are. That falls under the category of WP:SYNTH, just like the article itself. LokiiT (talk) 18:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Easy: Not all guerilla warfare belongs to Chechnya, less so to a long-gone Second Chechen war. Chechnya is just a piece of a larger (and scarier) picture; while Ramzan appears to be in control of his fief, the neighboring regimes crumble - but it's their problem, not Ramzan's. NVO (talk) 19:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. I made and started updating Guerrilla phase of the Second Chechen War (2009) because the war is still going on. Just because a Russian news agency does not call the attackers rebels does not mean this article should be deleted. These incidents aren't just some scattered landmines and a few people acting alone, this is an organization of fighters through out the Caucus or Russia fighting the Russian military and their allies. In 2008 the Russian military put 3,500 more troops in Ingushetia and over 4,000 more in the surrounding areas, these troop surges along with the continued and intensifying rebel attacks prove that this war is still going on. If it was over or near over Russia would either pull out or significantly draw down its forces not send more in. Through out the history of the Guerrilla Phase of the Second Chechen war the contributors of Wikipedia have added attacks from Dagestan, Ingushetia, Karabnio-Balkaria, and North Ossetia. None of these places are Chechnya. Yet we still list them under the Second Chechen war, it only makes sense. The other thing is I am doing my best with the help of others to only add significant attacks so the Guerrilla section does not get all jumbled and huge like the 2008 section. If you are looking at Guerrilla phase 2009 as WP:SYNTH then you would also agree with deleting Guerrilla phases 2005 through 2008. I ask you not to delete 2009 Guerrilla Phase but to help me make it and all other articles related to the Chechen war better thank you.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmp7 (talk • contribs) 23:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, none of the sources you supplied support any of your claims. I noticed in the Second Chechen War article a different user ended up having to revert a whole chain of your edits because you were adding erroneous information that wasn't supported by sources there too. You're evidently new here, so I won't assume bad faith on your part. It's a common mistake. You should head over to Wikipedia policies and read up on all the policies, specifically WP:Sources, WP:SOAP and WP:Original Research. LokiiT (talk) 16:38, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Lokki! I made a mistake on a couple of edits which was my fault but they were by no means errouneas. I also did add that estimations for Russian casualty's ran as high has 20,000 which is a fact by numerous organizations. I only put that because the article also had estimations for the Chechen rebels. I also changed the Localized Sporadic Fighting to Low Level Insurgency because I thought that was a more accurate title and everyone seems to be fine with it. I'm not sure if you brought up the whole edit thing to make me look bad, but it had nothing to do with the topic were on Guerrilla Phase 2009. Now when it comes to my sources for the Guerrilla Phase 2009 I used a mix so i couldn't be accused of any bias and I kept the information accurate to a t. I don't think anyone understands what you mean when you are saying this has nothing to do with the 2nd Chechen war. It's not like these are made up stories or something and I know a news agency does not have to say 2nd Chechen war or Insurgency for it to be one. I also like how you (Lokki) seem to think you are the only one that's right on this issue. You say one sentence about the Discussion of Guerrilla Phase 2009 and then go on a long diatribe about me and some edits classy Lokki! Next time you accuse me of doing something wrong bring a better argument! Im trying to make a good article, I dont know why your fighting me on that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmp7 (talk • contribs) 00:02, 28 February 2009 (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.