Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siege of Gaza City


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. No rationale provided for deletion, speedy keep under SK#1. Also seems to be a WP:SNOW incoming as well. (non-admin closure) ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 02:04, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Siege of Gaza City

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

Probably should be merged into 2023 Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip for the time being. GnocchiFan (talk) 23:16, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Wait - WP:TOOSOON & WP:RAPID & WP:BEFORE are the things at play here. The nominator proposed this "deletion" as a merge saying "for the time being", indicating a WP:TOOSOON logic. I am saying wait as (1) the event started today (2 November) and (2) big WP:RAPID and no WP:BEFORE events occurred, with this "merge proposal" being started as an AfD with no talk page discussions and no prod roughly 4 hours after article creation. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 23:31, 2 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Draftify then merge - I agree this is "too soon" and "too rapid" this would not be my normal response but we're going to get a bunch of articles about this war over the net several days. I've been seeing 1 to 5 at AfD every day. If we keep merging them, it'll be a lot of work by somebody - the closing admin? The AfD nominator? Santa Claus?


 * I suggest draftifying any potentially useful forks to more or less put them in storage until the dust settles. Then someone can look at a bunch of them together and merge the best pieces.


 * At the same time, they should be marked such that a merger is already approved. That way, there won't be a talk page merger discussion for each one.


 * This is an unorthodox proposal. Does it make sense? Do our rules allow it? Would this concept need approval beyond this AfD? Does it make life harder or easier for admins?


 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 00:00, 3 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Comment There is another article about this. Battle of Gaza City covers the same thing. This is a case of two articles about the same thing. There should be one article about this battle. Regardless of what the title uses at the start. "Siege" or "Battle". --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Noting, I just boldly redirected the battle article to the siege article since the siege article is linked to all the other articles. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:25, 3 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, Israel,  and Palestine.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 00:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep -- The IDF has encircled Gaza. The siege has begun. It's plainly notable per all the reliable sources that have acknowledged the encirclement. This is and will be a major singular battle in the war. One thing: rather than a screenshot of the more fluid map, some photos of the battle post-encirclement should be used (if any are available). -- Veggies (talk) 03:41, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - notability is not in question, and we have rapidly created articles in a developing military situation before. If it's too soon now, it won't be in 12-24 hours. Moving it all over the place is unnecessary WP:BURO. Fermiboson (talk) 04:13, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:RAPID and Fermiboson Flalf Talk 13:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep: No deletion rationale is being proposed. We can discuss a merge on the article talk page. Let&#39;srun (talk) 13:35, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per arguments above. Skitash (talk) 14:26, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - Hard to see how this is not going to develop into a useful article on a noteworthy event. An army encircling a city and allowing no supplies in is called a wikt:siege.--| Orgullomoore ( talk ) 17:13, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep might have been too soon when created (no comment on that claim) but its now a thing and no claim for deletion - merge should be proposed on the article talk page --DannyS712 (talk) 19:52, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. By now, it is obvious that this is a large-scale military operation, with the potential to become the most significant battle of this war. It is very well within the notability criteria. —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 20:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep this article is VERY notable and this is not how you do a move request  Abo Yemen ✉  06:16, 4 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Obvious keep this is going to be the single most important battle of the war. It is articles like Battle of Re'im that should be deleted. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 09:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep I concur with pretty much everyone here. It is very notable. Dwscomet (talk) 01:52, 5 November 2023 (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.