Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Palestinian animal bomb attacks


 * 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 Animal-borne bomb attacks. There is no consensus to delete but editorially a merge appears more appropriate Spartaz Humbug! 07:03, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

List of Palestinian animal bomb attacks

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

What is the point of this? Is this really an appropriate article to have in a serious encyclopedia? Doesn't satisfy WP: SYNTH or WP: INDISCRIMINATE. Stonemason89 (talk) 15:47, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  — Cliff smith  talk  23:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Although it's a strange article, I see nothing wrong with the concept. It seems a little biased, but most of that could be fixed by just removing the "Palestinian" part - call it "List of animal bomb attacks" instead. Bart133 t c @ 16:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Neutral This article is hilarious. Wikifan12345 (talk) 22:04, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe we should BJAODN it, then? Stonemason89 (talk) 00:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hilarious?  The idea of strapping bombs to innocent animals that will explode murdering people. possible large numbers of of people?   If you are truly amused by this, you must have thought the airplanes crashing into the World Trade Center was a hoot.AMuseo (talk) 00:02, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Amuseo, no humans (except for the perpetrators) were killed in any of these five attacks; every single one of them either failed or was foiled. Read the article. Stonemason89 (talk) 02:33, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Please do not make personal attacks. Stonemason89 (talk) 01:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I also thought it humourous, in a black way.Lionel (talk) 00:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge with Exploding animal. But a more general subject would be Animals in warfare.Biophys (talk) 02:57, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Merging into Exploding animals is no solution, because that article is an inappropriate merging of two distinct phenomena: animals that explode due to natural causes, and animals used to carry explosives intended to murder human beings. That article needs to be separated into two articles.AMuseo (talk) 01:15, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge per Biophys. --Shuki (talk) 19:59, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep.  A series of well-documented  incidents.  An article on Animals in warfare would be enormous.  I suppose that it would start with the domestication of the horse.  But it would not be an article about this phenomenon.   The phenomenon of using animals to carry explosives with the intention of murdering human beings is notable.AMuseo (talk) 01:09, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment This turns out to be one in a category Category:Animal born bombs .AMuseo (talk) 13:09, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Which is not even spelled correctly; it should be "Animal-borne bombs", not "born". Stonemason89 (talk) 13:52, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:SYNTH and WP:INDISCRIMINATE.  nableezy  - 01:07, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * This is not WP:SYNTH. it is a tactic in frequent use in the Middle East.  as for WP:INDISCRIMINATE, this is Murder !, planned, deliberate murder and also curelty to animals. Hardly trivial. AMuseo (talk) 01:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Five times in 15 years doesn't seem very "frequent" to me. It seems like you may have a bias with regard to the Middle East. Stonemason89 (talk) 23:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, while it may have been attempted murder, it appears as if no one save the perpetrators was killed in any of these 5 attacks. Which means that all five of them were essentially failed attacks. That leads me to question their notability even more. Stonemason89 (talk) 02:29, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * comment there is a category:Terrorish=m tactics into which this fits. it includes such articles as Letter bomb, Proxy bomb, Bicycle bomb, Suitcase nuke and others.  Frankly, it is difficult to see how it is possible to argue that those are appropriate articles and this is not.  What some editors appear to be arguing is  I just don't like it.AMuseo (talk) 01:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. As demonstrated by the sources in the article, the general topic it notable. This is not WP:INDISCRIMINATE and WP:SYNTH any more then WP:IDONTLIKEIT.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 13:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Brewcrewer.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:14, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge into Animal-borne bomb attacks. The cruelty to animals issue makes it important enough to be notable.  This is difficult to do in a neutral way as a list to a move to a tittle that dropped the list might be helpful.Dejvid (talk) 21:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Title change' to Palestinian animal bomb attacks is an excellent idea. Or Palestinian Animal-borne bomb attacksAMuseo (talk) 22:07, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge into Animal-borne bomb attacks with redirect. Material is notable and sourced, but a bit POV in its current context.  Moving it to a more comprehensive, less POV title is the best move.--Mike Cline (talk) 14:14, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Brewcrewer.40Chestnut (talk) 23:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * User's fourth edit. Stonemason89 (talk) 00:29, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Absolutely irrelevant to this discussion and stealthly uncivil. You've shown you are capable of counting to 4.  Everyone of us started contributing at #1.--Mike Cline (talk) 00:40, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Most new Wikipedians start contributing in the talk page namespace and/or the article namespace. For a new user to cut his/her teeth on AFD's is extremely unusual, and generally results in the user's opinion being discounted due to the possibility that they may have been recruited from off-wiki. So it's not "absolutely irrelevant" as you claim. Stonemason89 (talk) 03:24, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge into Animal-borne bomb attacks. It's a " major bizarre event in the history of religious violence in Israel." Lionel (talk) 00:34, 23 July 2010 (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.