Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kissufim tank ambush


 * 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. Nakon 04:40, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Kissufim tank ambush

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article appears to be about a WP:ROUTINE event without other evidence of notability. KDS 4444 Talk  05:21, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Condolences to the family of the one fatality, but this is not a noteworthy event. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:08, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Huldra (talk) 20:16, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete From a brief search on Google Books the event appears to be mentioned in passing in a couple of books, although it doesn't seem to have had a major bearing on what is obviously a prolonged conflict. I could not see anything which appeared to be "significant coverage" so it fails WP:GNG. Potentially some of this information might be included elsewhere (maybe Second Intifada?), although care would need to be taken to avoid WP:UNDUE. Anotherclown (talk) 08:57, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: agreed, this probably can't be sustained as a stand alone article, but the information (in limited form) might be applicable in a parent article. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:43, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I wrote an article a few years ago called "The destruction of tanks in the Second Intifada", including all the Palestinian attacks on IDF tanks and APCs. It was decided to delete it, for reasons that remains murky. Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 08:17, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Slow down. I would like to ask long-time editor User:Jokkmokks-Goran for his thoughts on creating this article, to consider the fact that, just as every skirmish in the American Civil War now has a page, pages are increasingly being created and kept about individual incidents in the Israeli-Arab conflict.  In addition, we should  consider the importance of not deleting incidents of violations of cease-fire line in peacetime.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:39, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * There's a bit of a difference between a skirmish which might involve relatively large bodies of men and this incident, which involved a single vehicle. Do we have an article on every single attack on or by a tank in the Second World War? Of course we don't. Are they any less important than incidents in the Israeli/Palestinian conflicts? Are the men who died in them any less significant? No, of course they're not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:04, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep I will continue to source the article, but the Washington Post claims that in response to this and other attacks, on the morning following this attack, the Defense Minister decided to terminate a then-recent agreement to return Gaza to Palestinian Authority control. Frankly, I didn't expect to find anything quite that stunning, which is why I expressed reservations but not an opinion on notability above.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:04, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep The problem that some people have with the article seems to be that it concerns a Palestinian attack on a legitimate military target. Every attack on Israeli civilian targets, no matter how insignificant (such as this one 2008 Jerusalem vehicular attack), have their own Wikipedia articles. I have written several of these and more often than not it gets nominated for deletion. If you delete every article that concerns Palestinian attacks on military targets you distort the nature of the Palestinian resistance. Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 08:17, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No. This is expected in the military, not so much in the civilian sphere. The same sort of differentiation occurs with civilian vs. military aviation accidents. If we got down to this level, we'd have to include every single skirmish for consistency; imagine doing that for World War II. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:52, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree entirely. There does for some reason seem to be some pressure on Wikipedia to have an article for every single minor event that has occurred in the Israeli/Palestinian conflicts, but we couldn't possibly do this (or should do this) for every war, so I'm not sure why this particular conflict should be an exception, unless there are political pressures at work. And that should never be an issue on Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:00, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep per the notability argument of E.M.Gregory, and the fact that WP:ROUTINE plainly does not refer to events like this (and should be read by the many people who cite it too freely). --Sammy1339 (talk) 03:00, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * From WP:ROUTINE: "Low-impact local events with light media coverage, even if that coverage is from multiple sources, perspectives, and over a period to time, may still be deleted per WP:ROUTINE." I don't get the problem here, I DID read it and I cited it specifically for this reason. How does this not apply here??  KDS 4444  Talk  05:35, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh boy. That passage was added recently without any discussion. It's out of line with the rest of the policy, and I've contested it. --Sammy1339 (talk) 05:40, 8 August 2015 (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.