Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Second Somali Civil War

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 of the debate was delete, discounting both keep comments - first one unexplained, second one refuted adequately. This term seems to be an insignificant minority view of the conflict's history, and Wikipedia is not obliged to have every insignificant minority view. Kimchi.sg 17:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Second Somali Civil War

I searched google for "Second Somali Civil War", and I got one hit - someone's blog. Our Somali Civil War article makes it seem as though the first civil war is not considered to have ended yet. I asked on Talk:Second Somali Civil War a couple of weeks ago for someone to cite a source to support the validity of this article, but the only reply in support of the article was a blank assertion of validity with no supporting argument or sources. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 14:24, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

• Don't delete --Kennet.mattfolk 14:58, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Its a stub. Ste4k 15:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Are there any verifiable sources for the article? Is anyone else besides the blog using this term? Any reliable sources that attribute the start of a civil war to the cited event? If verifiable reliable sources can't be found it is original research. Weregerbil 16:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

  I don't really know. You might want to check the history and ask. I do know, though, that the stubs are basically the outer reaches of intellect where the encyclopedia is hoping somebody would like to do the research on a new article. I'll change my vote if it's not a regular stub. Ste4k 17:34, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

  It seems to me that what makes the difference between this and a regular stub is that not only is there a lack of evidence to establish its verifiability, but there's an abundance of evidence to refute it. Everyone seems to agree that the first war hasn't ended, and google turns up no results for the phrase. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 18:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• comment all the info in this article can be found in Somali Civil War. is there any valid source that says there is a seperate second war? if not, redirect to Somali Civil War. --Samael775 17:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Still part of the Somali Civil War, I was not aware there had been any break in instability or conflict. SM247^{My Talk} 00:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete It looks like someone has arbitrarily decided that the "First Somali Civil War" abruptly ended and that the "Secondly Somali Civil War" abrubtly commenced in the same instant! I'm confident that history will assert otherwise. --Jacknstock 02:48, 2 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.