Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerusalem BMW attack


 * 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. v/r - TP 15:35, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Jerusalem BMW attack

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable as per WP:GNG, fails WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, belongs on List of terrorist incidents, 2008 at most. No real notability to warrant a standalone article. Cerejota (talk) 01:41, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  — Logan Talk Contributions 01:49, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  — Logan Talk Contributions 01:49, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep.
 * Notable per WP:GNG, since there is wide, WP:INDEPTH and WP:DIVERSE coverage in reliable secondary sources. Coverage according to my quick check included BBC, Haaretz, Jereusalem Post, Al Bawaba, Lebanon Wire, NY Times, Stratfor Global Intelligence, The Guardian, and many more. This is certainly not a "local interest" event. "Coverage of an event nationally or internationally makes notability more likely".
 * Similarly notable per WP:CRIME which states that media coverage can confer notability on a "high-profile criminal act".
 * Wikipedia consensus is that terrorist incidents and other crimes are generally notable if they are widely covered internationally by secondary sources, see for example Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar SUV attack and Omeed Aziz Popal SUV rampage.
 * It is especially notable since it represented a new militant tactic which evolved in 2008. See "Israel: Vehicle Attacks - A New Militant Tactic?. Stratfor Global Intelligence". (This is not a news source, it is a case study which WP:PERSISTENCE specifically states is evidence for long lasting notability). The source says that "Palestinian militants have discovered a new tactic that, while not thus far as deadly as suicide bombing, could prove more difficult to prevent".
 * The purpose of NOTNEWS is to prevent articles about "routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities" as well as "first-hand news reports on breaking stories". This article is NOT about a routine event or first hand reports of breaking news.
 * Surely this event has more long standing historical significance than Vehicles of the hijackers in the September 11 attacks or Lego Batman: The Videogame or Victor Zsasz (just three random articles. I know other stuff exists).
 * To conclude, I see this as another misuse of WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, this is becoming a trend. Marokwitz (talk) 08:21, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - clearly notable event. per WP:GNG. seems like an dead-beat AfD.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:20, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. BabbaQ (talk) 12:23, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "The general guideline is that coverage must be significant and not in passing. In-depth coverage includes analysis that puts events into context."
 * "Media sources sometimes report on events because of their similarity (or contrast, or comparison) to another widely reported incident. Editors should not rely on such sources to afford notability to the new event, since the main purpose of such articles is to highlight either the old event or such types of events generally."
 * The article links to three other, similar incidents. Isn't the notability and persistence due to this series of events and wouldn't it then make more sense to merge these into one article? DS Belgium (talk) 16:35, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Systemic bias must be avoided. I am convinced that if a man from Afghanistan, for instance, would have committed a similar vehicle attack in which he would driven a car in full speed into a crowd of random US soldiers in the center of New York, simply because they are American soldiers, no one here would have opposed the existence of such an article in the English Wikipedia. Especially not if the event would have been widely covered internationally. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 00:59, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:EVENT as there is no non-trivial coverage outside the initial news cycle and no lasting effects. I'm disappointed that the same old "if we don't give Israel a special exemption from all rules then we're guilty of SYSTEMIC BIAS" and "Events in Israel are inherently notable" arguments keep coming up. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 20:18, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:EVENT. All references seem to be dated in the three days following the event. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:44, 10 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.