Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/State terrorism in Syria


 * 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. Rje 00:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

State terrorism in Syria
Original research, POV, and inflammatory. Indrian 19:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Disagree - Absolute nonsence, the entire artcle is a cut an paste from State terrorism so that we can organize the state terrorism article better to avoid edit wars. Again it says its a stub hence we need to fix it not delete it Huracane 19:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * See Talk:State_terrorism


 * The title itself is POV, because may of the incidents are only alledged to have been carried out by Syria. The article is original research because it relies primarily on primary sources for its claims.  The article is inflammatory (though probably not intended to be) because of the current Middle Eastern tensions.  How do you respond to this? Note that I have no particular axe to grind on this issue and do not really care for purposes of this debate whether Syria sponsors terrorism or not, the issue is whether it conforms to wikipedia policy.  While the concept of such an article is not a bad one, the current article fails to be neutral and verifiable (verifiable in the sense that many of the acts are only alledged state terrorism without documentary evidence to back up the claim). Indrian 19:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - the article desperately needs a good scrubbing, but
 * While it may contain some original research, it also has at least one good reference, thus the whole article cannot be label original research. Sections that are original research should be edited out, but the need here is a need for editing, not deletion.
 * While there may be some NPOV violations here, the focus of the article is not irredeemably POV, and thus again the solution is editing, not deleting.
 * Inflammatory is not a criterion for deletion, nor is it really a big deal.
 * Just get out your gloves and start cleaning. WilyD 21:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - This article requires clean up not deletionRaveenS 22:01, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep &mdash; The current tone of the article seems mostly neutral, but perhaps it's been cleaned up? At any rate state-sponsored terrorism is widely-accepted to be the standard policy of several nation states, so an article of this nature is not unreasonable. It looks like a fork of the State Terrorism article, which itself is getting fairly long. I don't see a merge as an option. :-) &mdash; RJH (talk) 14:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep I am not an expert on the topic but a read of the entry seems fairly neutral and well cited. So I would not call for complete deletion, but perhaps those with better knowledge of the subject could verify some of the claims and help improve the article in general.--Realstarslayer 03:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep WholeLion 14:18, 27 July 2006 (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.