Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Killing of Yehoshua Weisbrod


 * 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. Despite the weak rationale the nominator gave to delete the article, the keep rationales are even weaker, with most of them sorely focusing on WP:GNG with sources of the event within a few weeks of it occurring, with none of them rebutting the stronger delete rationales that this event fails WP:EVENT with no significant lasting coverage. Secret account 19:17, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Killing of Yehoshua Weisbrod

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Might as well include redirect (Yehoshua Weisbrod), one way or another, no? Quis separabit?  17:58, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

There are many of Palestinians killed, just in the last couple of weeks. Like 22-year-old Kheir Hamdan, in Galilee, or 21-year-old Mohammad Imad Jawabra (see http://www.imemc.org/article/69681). None of these are given a Wikipedia article, so why one for Yehoshua Weisbrod? Are all Jewish victims notable, while Palestinian victims are non-notable? Huldra (talk) 21:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note that Huldra recently nominated Palestinian stone-throwing, a new article of mine, for deletion with similarly insubstantial arguments.ShulMaven (talk) 21:30, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: Note that I also nominated Articles for deletion/Murder of Netanel Arami, a similar article  made  by User:ShulMaven, and that article was deleted. Huldra (talk) 21:34, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I believe the deletion of the Netanel Arami article to have been ill-judged. Article was about a work accident in which construciton worker, suspended by ropes,fell to his death. Public clamor ensued. Rope was gfound ot have been cut. Inter-ethnic hate crime is suspected but the news sotries have temporarily halted due to a gag order.  It is likely to regain notability when the gag order is lifted, as occurred with the Murder of Shelly Dadon.ShulMaven (talk) 21:42, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Huldra also just nominated another new article of mine, Killing of Sergeant Almog Shiloni for deletion, within an hour or 2 of its creation.ShulMaven (talk) 21:42, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, Murder of Shelly Dadon should probably also be deleted. Nobody is convicted of it yet. There are accusations that the father was responsible for the killing. In any case; to put this in the category "terrorist incidents in Israel" before anyone is convicted is rather outrageous. And in any case; tragic as it is: young females are murdered all the time, in any country. Without it being automatically labeled as a "terrorist act". Huldra (talk) 21:58, 12 November 2014 (UTC)


 * @Nom - So go write some appropriate articles on those events that are notable by wp standards and not covered. And read wp:otherstuffexists. Which addresses your point. Saying specifically:"'The claim of 'Other Stuff Exists' most often arises in article deletion debate, where it is often used in a poor manner. Examples:... Delete We do not have an article on y, so we should not have an article on this. –GetRidOfIt!'."It's not cause for you to nominate for deletion articles on notable events, which articles cover matters that your POV wishes wp would not cover. Epeefleche (talk) 05:54, 25 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Notability established in the article. Many pre-internet events lack Wikipedia articles, yet have notability because of their impact on events at the time they happened.ShulMaven (talk) 21:30, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability is based on the rules discussed in WP:GNG and other areas. In this case notability is established by reliable sources discussing the killing as mentioned in the article including The New York Times. This has nothing to do with politics, just notability. --DoctorBob3 (talk) 21:43, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:31, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:31, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:31, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:32, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:35, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. The notability guideline most applicable is WP:EVENT. One trivial reference in 31 years (i.e. ) is insufficient to pass WP:LASTING, WP:DEPTH, and WP:PERSISTENCE. I have no objections to referencing the killing in Palestinian stone-throwing. - Location (talk) 02:56, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTTEMPORARY It was a big deal then, it retains significance now.ShulMaven (talk) 12:41, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The subject specific guidelines exist to help define what constitutes a "big deal" for Wikipedia purposes, and this event doesn't pass. There is no indication that this ever would have passed WP:EVENT had Wikipedia and these guidelines been in place in 1993, so WP:NOTTEMPORARY is not applicable. - Location (talk) 16:13, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:EVENT and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep  per DoctorBob3. Shame that Huldra is basing this request on political mudslinging instead of offering any policy-based arguments. Clear example of WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST and WP:BATTLEGROUND. Plot Spoiler (talk) 04:51, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. The absence of a bunch of comparable spam articles on Arabs who were killed is ultimately not relevant, but Wikipedia is not a news source, and the event evidently didn't garner any significant coverage more than a couple of days after it happened or have any lasting effect. (Even assuming that "people talked about Gaza for a bit" constitutes an effect, both of the sources cited there lump this in with a bunch of other killings. The sources don't think that it's individually notable, so why should we?) –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 05:34, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * And again 2 years later when the alleged gunman was made police chief by the PA in violation in the Oslo Accords, but the main point is that notability is WP:NOTTEMPORARY.ShulMaven (talk) 12:45, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Notability is not temporary, but the event needs to have been notable in the first place for that principle to "kick in." If it's a news-cycle event that's covered for a few days before the world forgets about it, it never had that notability. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 14:44, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * (In fact, your link specifically points this out, explaining that brief bursts of news coverage don't pass WP:EVENT notability guidelines.) –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 16:05, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep  Notability per sources. It's not just another incident involving stone-throwers. In this case someone was killed, it's as important as other fatal terrorist attacks against Israelis.--Keramiton (talk) 19:03, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep  - per sourcing, terrorist attack against israelis which is international news.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:54, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note Expanded sourcing of incident and its impact now in the article make notability very clear.ShulMaven (talk) 10:46, 17 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep . Per GNG. Robust coverage, with full-length coverage from half a dozen countries around the world. Epeefleche (talk) 19:20, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. The sources I sampled give very little attention to details, usually not even the person's name. The March '93 killings as a whole are notable and consequential, see Blockade of the Gaza Strip, but this cannot be said of the distinct events. The info worth salvaging here can make it into one line at Yasser Abu Samhadana. trespassers william (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Sampling error? Take a look at In Israeli's Unusually Brutal Death, Usual Lessons  and also at ] from the New York Times  which covers the fuss over the behavior of the UNRWA representative who witnessed the murder, also from the New York Times.ShulMaven (talk) 02:38, 18 November 2014 (UTC)


 * note I am continuing to build, source article. But some commentators seem to be risking location bias, that is, arguing for deletion of an article on a subject that would certainly be WP:NOTABLE if it had taken place in an English-speaking place, say, WoolwichShulMaven (talk) 16:31, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep as per GNG. Quis separabit?  15:14, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Random act of violence with no lasting historical significance. WP:NOTNEWS, WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Carrite (talk) 04:57, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * "NOTNEWS states the following: "'editors are encouraged to ... develop stand-alone articles on significant current events. However, not all verifiable events are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Ensure that Wikipedia articles are not: ...   News reports. Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of ... events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. For example, routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. While including information on recent developments is sometimes appropriate, breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information.'" The nature of the coverage of this event, which consists of many substantial articles devoted to it in various countries in different parts of the world in various languages, shows this to be something quite different than the "routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities" that NOTNEWS is meant to protect the Project from. Epeefleche (talk) 05:40, 25 November 2014 (UTC)


 * comment Article meets GNG because of international coverage at the time of this unusual incident; Because of widespread coverage of the political impact at the time; and because of coverage coming years later due to status of the killer vis a vis the Oslo Accords.ShulMaven (talk) 14:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Killings of Israelis or Palestinians are, unfortunately, routine events. As such, WP:EVENT applies. I don't see any evidence that the victim here was notable for anything else than this one event, nor do I see any significant lasting impact. --Randykitty (talk) 18:07, 25 November 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.