Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shipping to 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 delete. Consensus is that we don't want an article with the scope described by the title. A different question is whether to have an article about Amazon.com's services in Israel; anybody is free to create that and if needed to request undeletion of this content for this purpose.  Sandstein  10:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Shipping to Israel

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:NCORP, specifically WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:SIRS. Disguised brochure article. More of information note. Unsuitable for wikipedia.  scope_creep Talk  11:44, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to Amazon (company). Whilst I agree with the nom that this title is not suitable for a standalone article (it certainly does not describe its contents well at all) I disagree with their contention that the well-sourced content does not belong in WP. The article is mostly about Amazon's free shipping policy to Israel, and the complications that said policy faced as a consequence of COVID-19, so the logical thing would be to put it where it belongs. Havradim leaf a message  16:27, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * please explain why you moved this article from Amazon shipping to Israel immediately before nominating it for deletion. Your edit summary "Better and more accurate per suggestion talk page" does not appear to be warranted. However, delete or merge – I tagged this for notability three months ago and the problem has not been resolved. Verbcatcher (talk) 05:44, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete The content may be relevant but it doesn't deserve its own page. Find an existing page where this can go. On its own it fails Fails WP:NCORP MaskedSinger (talk) 11:59, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge into Amazon (company). Also the current page name is misleading.Gusfriend (talk) 03:03, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Agree RemotelyInterested (talk) 17:07, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename to Amazon services in Israel. Services as web hosting or archiving are not really shipped to Israel. Do not leave a redirect as the name is highly misleading, as others have pointed out before me. The topic meets WP:ORGCRIT. gidonb (talk) 14:08, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename to Amazon services in Israel: Per Gidonb. Article is good enough to pass WP:ORGCRIT. ASTIG️🎉  (HAPPY 2022) 15:15, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment It is a global enyclopeadia we have here, so if the article was kept it would be expanded to cover the whole world not just Israel. At the moment, the article is no more than an information note. There is no depth to it and while it probably passes WP:ORGCRIT, it fails WP:AUD as it favours one country, one group of people over all others. It was also created by a spammer, a UPE.   scope_creep Talk  16:01, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. This AFD is crumbling under its total lack of merit. Nominator agrees that the WP:ORGCRIT is met. WP:AUD is another reason to keep, not delete. Just follow the link and read what is written there. gidonb (talk) 05:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It is WP:NOTNEWS, written by spammer and fails WP:NCORP.   scope_creep Talk  09:38, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:ORGCRIT is at the core of WP:NCORP, making this into a moving target and even a bit desperate or at the very least unclear and unsure. As if when throwing at this many things then maybe something would stick. It reinforces my previous observation: This AFD is crumbling under its total lack of merit. gidonb (talk) 10:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: to determine whether a merge or rename is the best outcome. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star   Mississippi  02:17, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Does anybody else have any reviews on this poor news article?   scope_creep Talk  12:56, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete misleading title and the opening sentence talks about Amazon. Not sure what this is....Oaktree b (talk) 02:40, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Are you aware that nominator has submitted this article for speedy deletion and, after this request was declined, moved it to a weird name, then AfDd it the next minute? gidonb (talk) 17:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Under these circumstances a procedural keep is in order. Then see what can be made of the article, following the rules. Then it can still be discussed. If you do work by the rules you are not supposed to make name changes during AFDs so the name (change) that several people mentioned is very problematic for our discussion. gidonb (talk) 11:22, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * If you keep making false allegations like that against me, which is a form of personal attack, it is up to AN with you. You seem to be foaming at the mouth to keep this crap article, which is bit of a puzzlement since it is no more than an information note, two bits of news glued together and non-encyclopedic failing WP:NOTNEWS, and specific to one country. You also seem to trying to WP:BLUDGEON the whole argument, driving away other editors, instead of letting it flow freely, which is another reason to go to AN.  scope_creep Talk  11:49, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Everything I said is true. People can look this up themselves, as others did before me. I only just found out. Regarding more contributions by other editors: I'm in favor. This should not be about you or me. gidonb (talk) 12:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Purely speaking on timing, not merit as I have not evaluated the content thororoughly: @Gidonb your facts are out of order here. @Scope creep renamed the article prior to initiating the AfD. There's no issue with doing so at all Star   Mississippi  14:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Scope creep renamed the article prior to initiating the AfD. Right. That's EXACTLY what I said! I did not say that moving is forbidden. I said that a non-contributor (any) to an article moving it to a weird name, next minute nominating creates a problem as we cannot or should not move it back. Next respondents are going to check the contents versus the title, as happened above. Any initiator of an AfD should give success and failure of an AfD a fair chance. AfDs are about letting the community decide on optimal solutions for the article in a collaborative spirit. Please do not make this more personal than the nominator already did. My comments are purely about the principle. I stand 100% behind my conclusion that, given the circumstances around this AfD, it is best to close in a procedural keep. Let people improve the text and title. Then nominate if still relevant. I do not decide on all that. Others do. gidonb (talk) 15:53, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * You also said you are not supposed to make name changes during AFDs so the name (change) that several people mentioned is very problematic which @Scope creep did not do. That's all I'm saying. I'm not sure which of you is right, or wrong content wise, but accusing one another of doing something you didn't doesn't help a discussion. Star   Mississippi  21:35, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Your quote of me, you are not supposed to make name changes during AFDs so the name (change) that several people mentioned is very problematic, refers to what we should not do AFTER the AfD has started. I stand 100% behind this statement and have proudly repeated it here moving it to a weird name, next minute nominating creates a problem as we cannot or should not move it back. I did not accuse anyone of anything. This is behavior that was assigned to me by someone else and clearly does not apply to me. I noted that this AfD has a problem baked in because of the sequence of events around the nomination: change into a weird title THEN nomination. I analyzed the problem and suggested a constructive solution. No single person can do better than that! gidonb (talk) 22:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Now while I did not accuse anyone of anything, there were several false accusations against me here that are VERY annoying. I'll leave it that for now. gidonb (talk) 23:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I raised my eyebrows at the last-minute change of name, as it might be interpreted as an attempt to compromise the article before a deletion nomination. I asked to explain this change but they do not appear to have done so. However, this wrinkle is insufficient reason for a procedural keep, and we should assess the article in the normal way. 'Amazon shipping to Israel' is too narrow a topic for a useful article. We might usefully have an article on Amazon's shipping operations worldwide, or possibly on Amazon's activities in Israel (although we don't have corresponding articles on Amazon's larger markets), but this article is too far from either of these to form a useful starting point. The current text cannot easily be merged into Amazon (company), which does not have geographical sections. None of the other articles in Template:Amazon appear to be a viable merge target, soo I favour delete, as the only remaining outcome. Verbcatcher (talk) 00:14, 12 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete The topic is an Amazon service, shipping to Israel, so WP:NCORP applies. None of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability as they are all entirely based on company announcements with no "Independent Content". I agree with Oaktree's summary too - article is confusing as hell and TNT applies.  HighKing++ 13:33, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - Strange title and RS doesn't support notabilit as far as I can see. Deathlibrarian (talk) 10:54, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is a complete disjoint between the title and the content. The original title was a bit clearer (and I don't think it should have been renamed prior to nomination!) although that title just makes the non-notability of the topic more obvious. The content seems... weird. Taken at face value it is a scattered set of facts that do not add up to a coherent or notable subject. It seems like we are being invited to join the dots but to what end? Even if I am right about that, I can't see exactly what narrative is being sketched here but I assume it falls foul of WP:SYNTH. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:03, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete aside from the name drama, which could be solved editorially, there is still no content that adds up to an encyclopedia article here. Without that, no amount of fixing will address the issue. There were shipping issues to Israel. Maybe this could be covered within BDS Sanctions, but that doesn't even appear to be a fit nor is it a significant enough issue. Star   Mississippi  22:54, 13 February 2022 (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.