Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of deaths related to Russian apartment bombings


 * 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. One (talk) 00:26, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

List of deaths related to Russian apartment bombings

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article has been created out of process. It is essentially a content fork of List of people allegedly involved in Russian apartment bombings, which itself is a content fork of Russian apartment bombings. As it is forked content, it has been redirected back to Russian apartment bombings but the article creator has undone this. There is also WP:SYN/WP:OR issues here. It also needs to be mentioned that Russian apartment bombings is NOT at any such length which yet requires legitimate forking of content. Russavia Dialogue 18:43, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 18:44, 19 April 2(UTC)


 * Keep. These are obviously two different lists. Not all people allegedly involved in the bombings were killed, and vice versa. Of course the "list of possibly related deaths" could be included in main article, Russian apartment bombings, but there is an ungoing discussion at its talk page about creating sub-articles. Main article is indeed very big, so this is basically a WP:MOS issue. One should debate merging, rather than use AfD in this case. I asked everyone to debate the problems at this article talk page. But nominator refused. An AfD nomination is not the way to debate WP:MOS issues.Biophys (talk) 18:57, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This is not WP:OR because the death of every person in the list was related to the bombings in reliable sources. If anything was not, please tell this at article talk page, and the missing refs can be included.Biophys (talk) 19:25, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course it is. You yourself say that Litvinenko may have been killed because of his nutty view (that you endorse) that Putin is a paedophile. Why not an article List of people who were killed after calling Putin a paedophile? Other people's deaths are also tangently linked. It is WP:SYN, stating that Person A accused Person B of doing something, then Person A dies, so it must be because of the accusations that Person A made. And please don't cite "Death of a dissident", as a book written on an associate of Boris Berezovsky, by that associates wife and another associate of Boris Berezovsky, is not a reliable source of information in this context. Details of those killed are already in List of people allegedly involved in Russian apartment bombings and Russian apartment bombings. What's next? List of people with blue eyes who were killed and were only tangently related to Russian apartment bombings, which can then be split to List of people with blue eyes of which one is cock-eyed and were killed and were only tangently related to Russian apartment bombings? We are here to help build an encyclopaedia, not to advocate every tin-foil hat conspiracy theory out there. --Russavia Dialogue 21:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Inventing a List of ridiculous article names does not really proves your point.Biophys (talk) 21:28, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Out must articles like “Critique by some persons on alleged FSB non-involvement in Russian apartment bombings due to lack of evidence” go in a normal encyclopedia. Beatle Fab Four (talk) 19:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The nomination appears to promote an extreme view of what is a fork.  But Wikipedia is WP:NOT a database in the third normal form; it's intended to be read by humans.  This means there is inevitably some slight overlap between topics of various articles.  In the case at hand, there's a clear and definite difference between the topics of the supposedly "forked" articles; it would be rather unconstructive to interpret the minor overlap as a case of prohibited forking. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 20:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * We now have 5 articles on these bombings, and content is being duplicated in ALL with nothing being added. That Digwuren is firmly against content forking guidelines. And even more so when the main article is a whopping 57k (of which almost a third is made up of references) - that is not a size that content needs to be split, and then resplit from the split, like this has been. --Russavia Dialogue 21:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * We can have as many articles on a terrorism act as needed (see Category:Moscow theater hostage crisis for example) as long as these articles help a reader to find information he is looking for (that is what encyclopedia about). However, attacking other editors (as you just did with respect to Diwuren) hardly proves your point.Biophys (talk) 23:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep as a reasonable split, the main article would easily exceed 100k in size if this was merged back in. Martintg (talk) 03:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment You have used the same argument at Articles_for_deletion/Evidence_of_FSB_involvement_in_the_Russian_apartment_bombings - it would not push it past 100k, because content is already in the main article. This is another WP:CFORK done out of process. --Russavia Dialogue 03:43, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - reasonable, discriminate, sourced record of an important phenomenon. - Biruitorul Talk 19:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, the article shares (tragic) knowledge = that what's wikipedia is all about! — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 20:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you give a valid reasoning for keeping this article? Secret account 13:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. A completely unnecessary POV and content fork, which duplicates material from the main article. Offliner (talk) 21:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into the parent article and Redirect this page to that one. There is no need to have multiple articles covering the same subject. — BQZip01 —  talk 03:19, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, POV fork. Stifle (talk) 08:22, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete seems like a clear WP:NPOV fork, and fails WP:V, sources doesn't associated that they died because of the Russian apartment bombings or a conspirsy plot, etc. Secret account 13:15, 28 April 2009 (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.