Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palestinian immigration (Israel)


 * 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   speedy keep. WP:SNOW (non-admin closure) Mkdw talk 05:17, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Palestinian immigration (Israel)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The name of the article is problematic and POV as it implies that Palestinians are foreign to Israel rather than indigenous. Downwoody (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment So could renaming/moving the article itself perhaps solve the problem? I see where the page was moved and then was moved back again.  Was there ever a discussion or a consensus reached in regards to a page move?  Stubbleboy 20:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The whole article seems to be rather slanted and portrays Palestinians as foreigners - for instance there's a section on "Paletinian infiltration". Renaming it would help but there'd also need to be a rewrite. Can you suggest a neutral name? Since the article actually deals with Palestinian refugees from what is now Israel attempting to return the title "Palestinian immigration" is inappropriate or at the very least biased. "Palestinian repatriation to Israel" is more accurate but it's possible some wouldn't like that title either. Perhaps it should be merged with Palestinian refugee? Downwoody (talk) 23:32, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. A name dispute may be grounds for an RFC on the title, or other dispute resolution.  It's not grounds to delete the article. --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. It appears that the nominator has an issue with the title of the page.  The article was moved by nom, and then subsequently moved back again by another user before being listed here in AFD.  This sounds like a case for WP:RM, but certainly not grounds for the removal of the article.  Stubbleboy 20:58, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article has multiple problems, but there are insufficient grounds for deletion. So far nobody found a good title; Downwoody's complaint about the current title is quite valid. Zerotalk 00:37, 6 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep as Arxiloxos wrote, a name dispute is not a valid reason for deleting an article. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 14:05, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep naming issue, not AfD material.--Staberinde (talk) 15:28, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Encyclopedic topic. A rename may well be appropriate. Carrite (talk) 01:14, 9 February 2013 (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.