Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder of Rina Shnerb


 * 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. (non-admin closure) buidhe 15:28, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Murder of Rina Shnerb

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NOTNEWS, one in a long series of violent incidents on several sides (though our coverage is conspicuously slanted in terms of coverage of those incidents), no indication of lasting significance  nableezy  - 19:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC) 19:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  nableezy  - 19:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC) 19:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  nableezy  - 19:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC) 19:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  nableezy  - 19:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC) 19:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions.  nableezy  - 19:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC) 19:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Keep per WP:DIVERSE and WP:PERSISTENCE multiple international source still report about the incident and its consequences, ,, --Shrike (talk) 14:43, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, as with most crimes, there is coverage of the crime, arrest, and penalties. That is not persistent coverage. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 15:38, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually it is.There was a recent article 2 weeks ago about the murder year after the crime so yes it was persistent.

Comment It was the proposer who said that murders in I/P conflicts that receive wide coverage should be kept.I fail to see any difference except the nationality of the victim --Shrike (talk) 16:49, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I feel all of these articles should be deleted, in case you couldnt read the subtext of my vote there. Kinda silly of you to make that comment given your own vote in that AFD. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 17:24, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * My vote not because it was not notable but because it is one sided WP:POVPUSH piece per WP:TNT. So why do you voted keep there and then voting delete here? --Shrike (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, because crap articles like this are routinely kept. If articles about violence directed against Israelis should be kept, then too should articles on violence against Palestinians. Get it this time? I think all of them should be deleted. I dont think we need an article for anything besides some of the more well known attacks and fatalities, or the ones that had some sort of scandal or notoriety to it. That would include for example the Sbarro suicide bombing. It would include Faris Odeh, Khalil al-Mughrabi and Muhammad al-Durrah and al-Kheidr. It would not include the what are more regular occurrences that have the typical news stories about the attack, the arrest, and conviction and resulting sentence. And yes, at that article you called faithfully reflecting the sources and the hello video tape to be essentially propaganda. And said you didnt think it notable. I think all these articles should go. Get it? <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 18:01, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * So you going to propose Mohammad Habali article to AFD? --Shrike (talk) 13:29, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, when we see that these news stories get deleted on both sides. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 15:56, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Comment. Shrike, this is a matter of grammar. Nableezy wrote:- "There is an established precedent that violent acts in the long-running Arab-Israeli conflict merit articles if there is sufficient coverage in international news, at least for violence committed by Palestinians." That if is conditional on sufficient coverage, wide reportage, which, at least here, is not yet attested. There is no contradiction in his position.Nishidani (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Nypost AFP BBC and AP in my view are sufficient international coverage did you missed the links that I posted? --Shrike (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Sadly, this is WP:ROUTINE. The initial burst of coverage was the same as that of any news event, and less than a year later, coverage of the murder has ceased. Human-interest stories like "her parents had a baby" are not enduring notability. A selective merge to whatever the list article is could be appropriate? –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 19:10, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I fail to see who it WP:ROUTINE. it is not "announcements, sports, speculative coverage, and tabloid journalism" --Shrike (talk) 08:19, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep “persistent coverage” is widely subjective. IMO keep — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zarcademan123456 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete or create a list and merge these incidents into one page.
 * A few days ago, just one of an unending cycle of official murders, an autistic Palestinian, Iyad Hallak (32), was walking to his special needs school in central Jerusalem. He was confronted by two heavily armed soldiers and panicked. Shots were fired, he fled and when he was run down, cowering near his school, one of them pumped two bullets into him. It was the nth example of a George Floyd incident in the occupied territories, and I see 20 RS reports of the incident and the analogy. But one does not abuse wiki rules to memorialize these things, which are, for Palestinians, a weekly occurrence. The same applies here.
 * This is part of an ongoing series of stubs, which will remain stubs for lack of evidence of persistence of reportage, whose aim is to overturn WP:NOTMEMORIAL to get over a sense that Israel is uniquely prey to terrorism. Two others, Murder of Dvir Sorek, Murder of Ori Ansbacher like this have a handful of sources contemporary with the incident (within a day or two). They all massively fail persistence and egregiously violate policy. For those who leap at every Israeli death to make a stub, hoping it will again wriggle past the rules by disattention, the only option is to create a list, and include them all there, since in each case, you really will only  have(a) murder (b)assailant  (c)death/conviction of assailant.,with all sources essentially copying the same initial reports. Nishidani (talk) 09:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , If you think Iyad Hallak deserve an article go ahead and create one also see WP:OTHER.Btw Here is only recent article about Dvir Sorek  --Shrike (talk) 09:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * You haven't grasped what I wrote. I, like several others here, observe policy, and do not exploit Wikipedia to write up Palestinian deaths in order to create a propaganda image of a consistent record of victims of the occupation's violence. In the past I have created lists for that. Such incidents cannot stand on their own. It is notable that whoever writes up these articles carefully avoids citing articles about the larger context of murders like that of Rina Shnerb. They don't put in all of the information about the massive expropriations, enclosures of village lands, impoverishment, in order for illegal settlements and their folks to enjoy Jews-alone recreation parks, as Amira Hass provided in detail for the Shnerb case. By carefully omitting context, you create an image of in this case Palestinians popping out of nowhere and, as is their nature, killing Israeli Jews. There is no 'history' behind this weird behavior, just animal instincts and hatred of Jews. Go and read Amira Hass, The Tragic Hike That Has Nothing to Do With the Landscape and Land  Haaretz 26 August 2019, and add all of the details to this article, if you think it should be kept. Otherwise, this trimmed down version remains a POV loaded  memorial push, one more piece of wiki evidence of how those occupied savages torment and murder  nice people. Nishidani (talk) 09:51, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I am sorry but one sided propaganda opinion pieces shouldn't be added to neutral WP articles --Shrike (talk) 09:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * That is not propaganda. It gives very precise verifiable details of the context in which the murder of the girl occurred. Supported the inclusion of this type of stub smacks of propaganda for a cause, and since key details, in sources, of the context of the murder are suppressed, the manufacture of these bits and pieces has no intention to observe Wikipedia's principles of neutrality.Nishidani (talk) 13:48, 1 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per shrike Idan (talk) 15:30, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Here's something to be 'proud' of, apropos.Nishidani (talk) 17:25, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:09, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:09, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:09, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:09, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete pr WP:NOTNEWS. (Btw: If we look at Wikipedia, there are at least 10 times as many articles about Israeli civilians killed, as there are articles about Palestinian civilians killed. The reality is opposite: at least 10 Palestinian civilians are killed for each civilian Israelis killed. Palestinian lives definitely don't matter :-, Huldra (talk) 22:43, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per Shrike, this doesn't seem like a notnews event if it's still being reported on. Sir Joseph (talk) 01:15, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:PERSISTENT, and RS coverage is what it is, for better or worse -- take your issue up with the news media, not Wikipedia if you are annoyed that supposedly "Palestinian lives matter less than Israeli ones" (also, is this a deletion argument? Palestinian lives allegedly don't matter, so you'd rather Israeli lives not matter either? What the actual f*? No, of course I don't think you think that Huldra, but that is exactly how it reads) --Calthinus (talk) 04:10, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * You seem to misunderstand the issues with systemic bias and how an encyclopedia distorting the ratios here is effectively propaganda. But ok. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 04:45, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * We base our coverage on RS. Take your issue up with them. Not us.--Calthinus (talk) 05:25, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Um, I edit here, not there. And I could quite easily run up articles on hundreds of Palestinian deaths in the occupied territories at the hands of settlers or soldiers. And I could say hey look there are a bunch of news articles about it. But I would be committing the same WP:NOTNEWS violation that you are so invested in keeping. So I dont, I just nominate crap articles for deletion when I see them. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 14:34, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Calthinus. Editors with a 'Palestinian' interest have long decided not to 'harvest' numerous events of Palestinians being shot dead without provocation to make articles, this on policy grounds, and because writing quick stubs is boring and unencyclopedic. Therefore, observing the alacrity with which editors jump at Israeli casualties to make memorials they oppose the practice, is a unilateral abuse. The difference has nothing to do with saying Israeli lives don't matter. If 'we' were as ideologically motivated as some editors here we could churn out a dozen articles on Palestinian victims for every Israeli victim stub. One just doesn't play that game. What is remarkable about the 'pro-Israeli' editors who put this stuff up all of the time, is their failure to add anything other than the bare facts, ignoring key details the few sources used do supply, details that make for a far more complex picture. Their apparent aim is to record a murder, the skeletal outline, nothing more and then 'reactions' of outrage. It's POV manipulation: everyone knows that.Nishidani (talk) 07:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * And I personally am always disgruntled that the incompetence of editors means that when this memorial stuff is approved, people like myself are forced to waste valuable time pulling up all of the silenced details in sources which the pushy editors avoided adding, as I did at Death of Yehuda Shoham, in order to ensure that a balanced and neutral reconstruction emerges. The practice of writing such stubs is a sign of an oxymoronic vigorous laziness: getting a few data down in a jiffy for  a POV slant, hoping it gets approved, and then leaving the burden of writing to fix the partisan skewing, to others.Nishidani (talk) 08:01, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This may all be true. But nothing addresses the matter that our coverage is based on RS. Side keep has policy in its favor, and it appears the three of you aren't even disputing that point anymore, but instead are arguing that there is disproportionate coverage of Israeli victims relative to Palestinian ones. That may even be true. But we are not here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS.--Calthinus (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * What's writing a great wrong to do with it? I certainly am on record as stating over over a decade that editing to right a great wrong is pointless, since one party won, the other is humiliated out of history. and there's no point thinking things will change. What wiki is about is the encyclopedic compilation of the known factual record of events that have encyclopedic significance, and my guide is all articles is - see what books, reviews and serious articles say to ascertain continuity and importance.


 * Several times in the past, I and others have waited a month and more before making, or contributing to an article on a Palestinian death. One wait, and this is what rule-compliance asks of us in this kind of reportage. I,e,


 * Beitunia killings occurred 15 May 2014. Coverage was intense so


 * the article was started by another editor 16 June 2014, one month' later.
 * 22 June 1024, I started to add some edits, a week thereafter, i.e. five weeks into the intense news cycle. The event has been mentioned in several RS books since then, and innumerable articles. I.e. it has permanent coverage down to 2019.


 * Contrast this type of stub.
 * The Murder of Rina Shnerb occurred on 23 August 2019
 * A stub was made the very next day, with 6 newspaper reports of that day. After 9 months we have a stub with 10 articles, the diff being (a)suspects were arrested (b) their homes demolished (c) they were brought to trial. I.e. routine. Someone is killed, suspects are arrested, homes demolished, and convictions obtained.


 * [ I think many who back this kind of stubbing think the deleters have a chip on their shoulder. No, as with highbar RS compliance, they have read WP:NOTNEWS,WP:NOTMEMORIAL WP:SUSTAINED, WP:NOTABILITY OF EVENTS) and come away with the impression these stubs are an abuse of the purpose of our coverage of contemporary events, effectively newspaper obits there for political point scoring. And, one doesn't mirror the abuse to 'get even'. It's called editorial integrity. Nishidani (talk) 18:33, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Six sources in one day actually speaks to the strength of RS coverage; editorial laziness is not an argument for deletion. Frankly the fact that we are talking about Palestinian victims here at all is putrid. What are Palestinian victims, an eraser to scrub away Israeli victims? The solution to insufficient coverage is not erasing other coverage, and this is not some disgusting contest. If you want more coverage of Palestinians who have suffered and be murdered, really, you should work on that, not erasing Israelis.--Calthinus (talk) 15:15, 5 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep based on persistent coverage in reliable sources. Inclusion is based on what reliable sources have covered, not what editors believe they should have covered. Our concept of notability is a proxy for the inchoate notion of "what a reasonable person might turn to an encyclopedia to look up," and the more extensively something is covered, the more likely someone is to look for additional information about it. That's why we cover a much higher percentage of Jersey Shore cast members than EMTs, even though one group is virtually of no earthly good to almost anyone. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.  Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong! (talk) 19:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per Shrike, Calthinus and H. Wolfowitz. Also, I do not find the OP's idea that suffering should be erased in the name of equality acceptable. François Robere (talk) 09:46, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * lol, please dont make things up, it isnt civil. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 14:53, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * What is being made up here? Francois has pointed out exactly what happened in the above conversation, once you strip away the accusations of propaganda and fluff. --Calthinus (talk) 15:15, 5 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - per reliable sources. Per continued coverage. Per WP:GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 14:18, 5 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.