Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sidi Bel Abbas sanctuary arson


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Sidi Bel Abbas sanctuary arson

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

unsolved arson case in Spain lacks notability Jason from nyc (talk) 02:25, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Just not notable" is an indequate deletion rationale. Could you please explain why you believe this not to be notable? Phil Bridger (talk) 22:16, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, let me argue the case. Arson destroying religious institutions is sadly too common. A quick google shows and  and . We have some articles on Wikipedia concerning church arson such as 2010 East Texas church burnings but we don’t have entries for every individual arson. The Sidi Bel Abbas arson is just one of many. The arson in this case is said to “burned by unknown parties” and then we cite speculation as to the perpetrators. We have no citation in which this arson is the main topic. I don’t find any further references and it’s been almost three years since any substantial material has been added. Jason from nyc (talk) 02:24, 28 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Jason from nyc (talk) 14:49, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 29 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 00:19, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Gongshow  Talk 18:13, 10 October 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete: Not notable. Multiple searches failed to turn up anything resembling substantial coverage, espcially of a persistent nature. Sadly, I have to agree that such acts of arson are, unfortunately, too commonplace to confer any notability to the present case. The speculation in the article does not add any value, either, and without it, there isn't very much left. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 20:04, 10 October 2012 (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.