Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Torture and castration of a Ukrainian POW in Pryvillia


 * 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. If you'd like to argue for an article rename, please take it up on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 23:14, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Torture and castration of a Ukrainian POW in Pryvillia

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

A discussion to merge this account of a war crime into the article of the war crime's location (which quickly accrued opposition) cited WP:EVENTCRIT, which I still think holds true if we look at the criteria:
 * Routine kinds of news events (including most crimes, accidents, deaths, celebrity or political news, "shock" news, stories lacking lasting value such as "water cooler stories," and viral phenomena) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance.

This is a single incident of a war crime among many other incidents of war crimes. This one incident and its six sources can be reduced into a paragraph of information: it already has been at War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, which contains the same information as this article.

Google hits for "Pryvillia war crime", including any word from Bellingcat or other Western sources, fall off after August 2022. Even if newer sources were presented to argue that this topic has "enduring historical significance", they would still be best added to the one paragraph in War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. There are no individual articles for every ISIS beheading video; there are individual articles for notable individuals that became the subject of ISIS beheading videos. I'm not proposing against the inclusion of the atrocity at all, but whether the sources indicate this topic is significant enough to merit an article is questionable when its impact is minimal and serves best as an example to be listed in a larger, related article—which, again, it already is. ‒ overthrows 23:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC) * Merge without prejudice to War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. It absolutely merits inclusion on Wikipedia somewhere, but despite how horrific it was, currently there is no evidence of enduring historical significance. Even the Russian and Ukrainian wiki articles don't seem to have sources beyond August last year. I say without prejudice because I think it is plausible that after the war it may receive more attention as a war crime. I thus disagree with the OP about the emergence of new evidence of enduring significance. If that existed (or is produced during the course of this discussion), that would change matters and a standalone article may well be merited. OsFish (talk) 02:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Ukraine. ‒ overthrows 23:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep (changed vote). Having seen some of the other pages on incidents from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, it became clear to me that what was missing in this page was details of formal international reactions in order to raise the story above gruesome detail. I looked those up and added them. I now think the article should be kept.OsFish (talk) 02:27, 27 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep based on significant coverage. Yes, the coverage has 'fallen off' since it happened, but that is true for ANY event. There's always more coverage initially then after awhile. Also, yes, I know about WP:OTHERSTUFF but there's nothing special about this article, we have a lot of these articles from this conflict that document one-time incidents or individuals who were briefly in the news and then disappeared. For example: Torture of Russian soldiers in Mala Rohan, Makiivka surrender incident, Stara Krasnianka care house attack, Vita Zaverukha. All these articles are in the same situation - initial coverage (maybe even less in some of these cases) and then a falling-off.  Volunteer Marek   18:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for those links to similar pages. They helped me grasp what was missing from this page. I've added international reaction to the page and have changed my vote to keep.OsFish (talk) 02:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per arguments presented by Volunteer Marek. There are currently 71 entries listed under Category:War crimes during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and, while the all-inclusive article War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine is useful for a condensed outline of each such crime, as of this writing, it consists of 247,013 bytes and contains 378 inline cites. The nominated article, on the other hand, has 6,464 bytes and six inline cites. Thus, merging an abridgment of it into the already-overlong entry would not be helpful to users especially since the event has confirmed its notability via major media coverage. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:56, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. This incident has a borderline notability, just as several other incidents noted by VM. In my opinion, this is not so much a matter of coverage in RS (all of them are covered), but having the incident investigated by a 3rd party reputable organization, Bellingcat and Conflict Intelligence Team in this case. Without such investigation, one could question if the incident had actually happen (and what exactly had happen), which would be an argument for deletion I think. An additional factor here is the extraordinary cruelty. That is what makes it notable; this is not just shooting someone. My very best wishes (talk) 22:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep, no merge to Pryvillia. This is not a routine crime blotter event. In general I am uncomfortable with articles based on Telegram videos, but there's no question that Telegram is used for messaging in this war, so here we are. The primary reason I unreservedly support keeping this one is that Bellingcat believes this, and they are authoritative. I urge other editors not to take the Mala Rohan article as a model, since it, on the other hand, does in my opinion need to be deleted as incoherent. I've spent more time at the War crimes article than was good for me, and can attest that if anything it needs to spin off more daughter articles. So no to merge back.Elinruby (talk) 07:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY due to User:OsFish's work. I also agree with User:My very best wishes' point about "extraordinary cruelty". Gildir (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comments: I would like to present that the title is wrong. I am sure that it was missed that "and shot him in the head" is included. Although not as shocking as the"castration of a Ukrainian POW" it is nonetheless horrendous and likely a war crime, per chapter III Article 86: "No prisoner of war may be punished more than once for the same act, or on the same charge". Of course Part II, article 13 ("Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated") would be violated. At any rate it would seem that a better title could be used in an encyclopedia. -- Otr500 (talk) 20:12, 28 January 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.