Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terrorist incidents


 * 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 of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 11:43, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

List of terrorist incidents
List of terrorist incidents is an article consisting entirely of original research. Attempts have been made to cite sources and have failed. Labeling certain events "acts of terrorism" and labeling people responsible for the events "terrorists" simply because an editor wants it to be so is against Wikipedia policy.


 * Delete --The Random Element 21:11, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - While I do agree with some of the points raised, this article does not deserve to be deleted. It was actually quite helpful in finding examples when I needed them. Daemon8666 22:07, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - I agree with some of the points but believe that this article needs to stay. I think that most of the incidents listed on the page would be considered terrorism by most of the world, though there are of course several disputed incidents. PBP 22:44, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. &mdash;Crypticbot (operator) 14:23, 16 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. Very useful overall, as mentioned above. PJM 15:14, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Important and useful article. --Kalsermar 17:18, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per PBP. howcheng   [ t &#149; c &#149; w &#149;  e  ] 17:39, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per all the above. If it's causing problems then fix it or list it for cleanup. Deletion is not the answer in this case. - Mgm|(talk) 20:21, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Inherently POV article, and classifying events before the 20th century as "terrorism" is anachronistic too. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 21:44, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable, verifiable and encyclopedic. Possibly needs more verification. Capitalistroadster 22:53, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It needs a cleanup, not a deletion. --Loopy 01:04, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. This list is going to be inherently POV and probably subject to edit wars. For example, the FBI classifies the Animal Liberation Front and the Earth Liberation Front as the worst terrorist groups in the USA. Why are the numerous attacks by the ALF and ELF not on this list? &spades;DanMS 02:05, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment replyThis list will be long in the building. A better question might be why has no one gotten around to adding them in yet, wouldn't it? Or am I wrong here? Daemon8666 14:51, 18 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep, despite what I see as a problematic title. D e nni &#9775;  05:30, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep -- if only as a means of avoiding ethnically-based sub-lists. This way they can all go in together.  Does anyone know the date on which General Cromwell's troops beat a prison governor to death with his own (wooden) leg ? --SockpuppetSamuelson 14:58, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * keep potentially useful. UkPaolo 14:27, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - nomination in bad faith. Nominator unhappy that his edits are not accepted to the article.  Attempts at discussion resulted in this AfD. -  T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  18:43, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Preaky 06:56, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - This article provides encyclopedic information and should stay. – Zntrip 05:49, 21 November 2005 (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.