Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beit Hanoun November 2006 incident

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. If you feel an article is inaccurate or nonneutral, feel free to edit that article accordingly. If you feel an article's title is inaccurate or nonneutral, feel free to propose to have it renamed. But do not circumvent the normal editorial process by creating compeeting version/s of the same entry. Incidentally, this entry could use a lot of expansion: for ex., that many IDF commanders, including the division commander responsible for the firing the shells, were resolutely against using artillery fire precisely due to the likelihood of these type of incidents, but the Regional Command(?) General Staff/MoD/PM thought otherwise; or operative details, for ex., 12 shells being involved in the incident; or that the death toll is now up to twenty. In other words, no shortage of work, but keep it all in one place, without forking and without employing AfD as an editorial mechanism. El_C 22:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beit Hanoun November 2006 incident

Beit Hanoun November 2006 incident (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

NPOV version of Israeli shelling of Beit Hanoun. The other article is better sourced and neutral.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Burgas00 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 14 November 2006(UTC).

  • Unequivocally strong KEEP Submitter (User:Burgas00) is a friend and co-POV-pusher of Striver (who created the article Israeli shelling of Beit Hanoun as a POV Fork, and which article was already submitted for deletion). Obvious POV pushing and trolling even to submit this page for deletion, and he wouldn't even sign his own POV-pushing name to it. RunedChozo 22:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • That a user would abuse process like this is inexcusable and I urge this be speedy rejected. RunedChozo 22:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per RC. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 22:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, this article is older than Israeli shelling of Beit Hanoun (oddly enough by only nine hours), which was already nominated for deletion. The nomination does not mention this. Would highly recommend a Speedy Keep if at all possible. Also, this appears to be an orphaned and improperly listed AfD.--Rosicrucian 22:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment The reason it's older by 9 hours is that after its creation, POV pusher User:Striver created the other one as a POV Fork to try to get around NPOV, inserted blatant propaganda, and then "suggested" a merge as a shoehorn to try to force POV material into the real article. RunedChozo 22:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment I've corrected the format to properly reflect the nominator and make sure it's listed appropriately. Hopefully now that people can see the AfD this should be a fairly easy speedy keep.--Rosicrucian 22:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong and speedy Keep This article is much better-written than that Hamas propaganda POV fork Israeli shelling of Beit Hanoun. The narrative is more neutral here. Hkelkar 22:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep per WP:SNOW. Notable news event; Wikipedia is not censored. Seems like a bad faith nom. --Czj 22:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment, abstention per [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. As an uninvolved party (with no POV on any Middle East conflicts whatsoever), I find edits such as these to be "canvassing", and an attempt to create a possibly-false sense of concensus. Let some more opinions from those who weren't solicited come in before anyone even dreams of closing this as a speedy- or snowball-keep. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 22:56, 14 November 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.