Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of victims of the Babi Yar massacre


 * 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 keep  faithless   (speak)  05:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

List of victims of the Babi Yar massacre

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

Fork of Babi Yar Jd2718 (talk) 20:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I thought it obvious when I said "fork" what the POV fork was. My error. This is an attempt to make a prominent list of Ukrainian Nationalists killed at Babi Yar months after the massacre. The names are (save perhaps two) non-notable. There is almost no possibility of learning the names of those killed during the massacre itself. So when I said fork, I should have said "typical East European nationalist fork." Jd2718 (talk) 11:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * A list of known Jewish victims, including those that died in th Babi Yar tragedy is available Here. Just go through them and find the more prominet ones Bandurist (talk) 13:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Trim, turn to prose and Merge with Babi Yar.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined  /  C ) 21:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge & redirect -- memorial/pov fork. Exploding Boy (talk) 21:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I would gladly agree to merge, BUT the AfD proposer (Jd) is the same one who was causing friction over the matter when it was still a part of the main BYar article.Galassi (talk) 21:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment If it is not notable it is not notable. Setting up a separate article does not make it so. A list of 10 red links, a poetess (whose notability derives, in large part, from her murder at Babi Yar), and a mention of dozens of priests does not make an article. You've set up a blank section for Jewish victims, but we know it will not be filled. There were 50,000 - 100,000. The only reasonable course is to delete the fork and leave in the main article what is notable: that among the 100,000 Nazi victims at Babi Yar were some 600 members of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. Jd2718 (talk) 21:38, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It may take a few weeks but I will translate and port over the information on those listed from the Ukrainian encyclopedia. Bandurist (talk) 13:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Notability is not a useful criteria here, because some of the victims were indeed notable (many OUN members were the cream of the nation), while wiki notability standard is never applied to pornographic film "actors", for example.Galassi (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, notability is always a factor, even for porn actors. Exploding Boy (talk) 21:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Try to put a notability tag on some porn article and see what happens.......Galassi (talk) 22:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've personally nominated articles on non notable porn actors for deletion, with success. Natalie (talk) 16:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * trim, merge, redirect and move on. Guy (Help!) 22:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Some of the people who died there were notable and made significant contributions to Ukrainian culture. Just because articles have not been added for the bulk of them as yet on Wikipeda is not a reason for wholesale deletion. The Babi Yar atrocity needs to be documented from all aspects rather than just one particular view. Bandurist (talk) 22:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ...Which should be easily done from the main article, with links to those notable people. Exploding Boy (talk) 22:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. The subject (victims of a massacre) is highly notable, encyclopedic, and thoroughly sourced / sourceable.  As the largest single massacre of the entire holocaust, one of the most atrocious events in human history, the different facets of the massacre certainly are worthy of separate articles in the encyclopedia.  If the horror of the event is too great, complex, or momentous to be covered fully in the main article, it only makes sense to discuss different aspects of it elsewhere.  The death of 33,000+ people, many of them notable and important to a nation's culture, is an issue in itself, beyond the act of killing.Wikidemo (talk) 01:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep if this list is too long to include in the Babi Yar article, then keep it as its own article. Ostap 02:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep.Galassi (talk) 03:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * KeepLute88 (talk) 03:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - the main article about the massacre remains Babi Yar, but not everything can or should be included under it, so this is a good way to include all notable and relevant information.--Riurik(discuss) 05:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. As I noted on the talk page, there is List of victims of Nazism and if the format says as a very strict minimalist list of names (with notable ones have articles), I think it would be fine.  Given the number of victims, it is too probably large to be merged back.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. Kittybrewster   &#9742;  10:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong redirect This is barely an article. All of these facts should be in the main article. AniMate  03:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The article had been up 3 days. It was first put up, listed for speedy within five minutes (under WP:NOT), and is now getting names and other information started.  It deserve some time to build. Even the 33 people in the Virginia Tech massacre has a separate article, which could easily be merged back in.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Merging would in my opinion negatively affect the main article Babi Yar by including information best presented in full under a separate entry. --Riurik(discuss) 05:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep; it's not even really a borderline case. Any time you take tens of thousands of people from a major city, and massacre them, just statistically enough of them will be notable to write a meaningful, annotated list which contains details out of the scope of the article on the massacre itself. Antandrus  (talk) 04:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The article is only about Ukrainian victims who were members of the Ukrainian Nationalist Organization (there were some 600), and has no potential to grow beyond that, because the Jewish victims (tens of thousands) are anonymous. Jd2718 (talk) 04:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment That is not exactly true. According to Haaretz in 2006, roughly 10% of the Jewish victims were identified; it's a small number, but refutes your claim of anonymity.  The second part that it "has no potential to grow" is true only if this article is deleted.  Should the wikipedia community decide to keep it, it will have a chance to grow based on the 10% of names that have been identified so far.--Riurik(discuss) 05:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. The main article is large already to merge. But remove duplicate text, to avoid unnecessary forking, which is always problem for coherent maintenance of texts. Mukadderat (talk) 06:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. To merge this with the main article would cause the main article to be unwieldy, which is the point of splitting off a list. Not every split equals a "fork", especially one like this. Bellwether B  C  15:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - Sadly WP is not a WP:MEMORIAL, so just as the list of 9/11 victims was not permitted, so should this not be permitted as a memorial of the same type. Exit2DOS2000   •T•C•  06:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - WP NOT:Memorial policy does not disqualify death/murder of notable victims. Here is the policy verbatim: Wikipedia is not the place to honor departed friends and relatives. Subjects of encyclopedia articles must be notable besides being fondly remembered.  Those listed currently in the article seem to qualify as notable.  If there is a disagreement then any editor is free to challenge the notability of that particular victim, but the entire article itself should not be deleted based on the WP NOT Memorial policy.--Riurik(discuss) 21:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment WP is not the place to honor departed friends and relatives and, by extension political allies... This article is a memorial to non-notable members of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. Jd2718 (talk) 00:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * To my understanding, the "memorial" policy is there to guard against relatives or friends of the diseased who in order to honor them, attempt to immortalize the dead person by creating a wikipedia entry. This is not the case here.  I agree that the OUN members were probably not notable, but they are not listed by name, which seems to be ok since under the Babi Yar article we mention Roma victims in the aggregate.  Writers, poets and athletes are also mentioned in this article.--Riurik(discuss) 19:32, 7 March 2008 (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.