Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ilsaghat massacre


 * 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   merge to 1950 Barisal Riots. slakr \ talk / 01:59, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Ilsaghat massacre

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails GNG Darkness Shines (talk) 06:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. In what way would it fail general notability guideline? A massacre of around 30 people definitely is notable, and it would also seem that maritime and aviation incidents even have a stronger notalibity in Wikipedia, as this massacre happened on S.S. Sitakunda. --Pudeo' 18:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable incident. More so in the context of persecution of minorities in erstwhile East Pakistan, now Bangladesh. BengaliHindu (talk) 14:16, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Massacres of about 30 people is notable. good sourcing.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:09, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Good sourcing? Are you on crack? It has one source, from 1950. Hahahahahaha Darkness Shines (talk) 23:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Please remember to comment on the argument, not the person making it. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Very less information obtained from a single source. Fails notability until matter from genuine sources can be obtained. Kanga Roo in the Zoo (talk) 20:38, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - only a single source given, that too seems to be unreliable, can't even say if it's really a massacre or a boat capsize, or whether there was actually any casualties there. -- Zayeem  (talk) 17:22, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, I had thought this would be a slam-dunk keep, but there doesn't appear to be much in the way of other reliable sources on this topic. I concede that coverage may be available in Bengali, or under another name, but I don't think this is verifiable enough to keep at the moment.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:05, 22 February 2014 (UTC).
 * Delete, insufficiently notable as only one source provided and none others found. Stifle (talk) 15:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, since we gauge an incident's notability with respect to its coverage in reliable sources and not with respect to its severity or some other attribute, I find it a non notable incident, given the fact that it finds mention in only two sources: the one in the article (that I am unable to verify) and the other (Page 141) one that doesn't verify much of the details in the article. Any useful info after verification can be merged into 1950 Barisal Riots. -- S M S   Talk 18:01, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to 1950 Barisal Riots, which can cover the relevant, verifiable information. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect, at least until a full article can be provided -- This is a badly written article on one event in a campaign of persecution of minorities. I am not qualified to judge how significant the events were, but the whole campaign was clearly significant.  Whether a good article on this subject is possible, will depend of the quality of the source material available.  If it is no more than the odd paragraph in newspapers of the day, it is probably better staying merged.  If there are WP:RS giving detail, it can be reinstated in due course.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge per Bushranger. Good idea: it allows us to save the material history, while keeping to our policies. Bearian (talk) 21:52, 23 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.