Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghadir Mokheimer
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 delete. Although tragic, Wikipedia is be a memorial to victims of violence. —Kurykh 01:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ghadir Mokheimer
Delete sad story: a young victim in the Israel-Palestinian conflict, unfortunately there have been hundreds or thousands of them and she is no more notable than any other. This apparently was nominated for deletion shortly after her death (and creation of the article) but I cannot find the link to that discussion. It was obviously kept. Now we have had a couple of years to see if she is "notable" or was just "newsy" then. Not a political call one way or another - If I could find an Israeli victim of equal non-notability, I would have nominated him/her as well. Just found her looking through categories with only 1 article. Carlossuarez46 01:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete.
This is a textbook application of WP:BLP1E.The information we have about her life is nowhere near enough for a biography. It would be less obviously wrong to merge this with History of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but I think that would probably violate "Wikipedia articles are not simply news reports". --Allen 01:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC)- Comment Although I am not certain she's notable, this is anything but a "textbook application" of BLP1E, since BLP1E only applies to living persons, which sadly she is not. BLP:1E does not and should never be applied to the deceased, since there are deceased individuals who are highly notable for one event. --Charlene 04:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Oops... I was so focused on the B, P, and 1E that I forgot about L. Thanks for correcting me. I'll keep my vote based on WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:BIO, though I admit it's a less clear-cut case than if WP:BLP applied. --Allen 13:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Although I am not certain she's notable, this is anything but a "textbook application" of BLP1E, since BLP1E only applies to living persons, which sadly she is not. BLP:1E does not and should never be applied to the deceased, since there are deceased individuals who are highly notable for one event. --Charlene 04:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Very controversial and weak keep This AFD is potentially very controversial with some editors willing to kill or die in order for their opinion to be followed. WP:BLP1E states that the event, not the person, should be covered. Merging the article with a newly created article called the "Death of Ghadir Mokheimer" would qualify or the "2004 uprising and civilian deaths..." would qualify. The article also needs much rewriting to summarize what happened in October, 2004. However, the basic facts already present is the start of a qualifying article. The fact that it was a "keep" after an AFD and the facts of the article is unlikely to change (no convictions) may mean that the article should stay and this AFD thrown out. Fineday 02:09, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Probably speedy under WP:CSD#A7. I agree the person is non-notable, although her death was tragic. Also, because she is dead, WP:BLP does not apply. This is covered under WP:BIO. -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 03:41, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete
per WP:BLP1E. It is worth noting that ArbCom has recently interpreted WP:BLP as applying to the recently dead as well.WP:BIO and WP:NOT#NEWS. See my comment below. MartinDK 03:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)- I realize that, but three years is surely beyond recently dead. Flyguy649 talk contribs 04:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- The only thing that the arbitrators were really clear on in the Badlydrawnjeff case was that WP:BLP is about not doing harm and that WP:BLP should apply to the (recently) dead. In this case I don't think it really matters if we refer to WP:BLP or not since we agree that she fails WP:BIO anyway and we seem to agree on how to interpret WP:NOT#NEWS. Hence I think it would be better just to refer to those policies which are far less controversial. MartinDK 06:41, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- I realize that, but three years is surely beyond recently dead. Flyguy649 talk contribs 04:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- shouldn't this be Transwikied to wikinews? Or are past news reports not acceptable? Naufana : talk 03:46, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Wiki[edia is not a site for memorials or for news stories. per WP:NOT. It is tragic and horrifying that a life was violently terminated so young, but it is not encyclopedic, and the article fails WP:BIO. Edison 04:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Merge and Redirect to al-Aqsa Intifada. Her death doesn't seem to have garnered enough long-term notability (or has it? Is it possible to gauge how notable her death is in Palestine as compared to in the US?), but it was part of a larger event, and I think merging would be appropriate. --Charlene 04:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, Wikipedia is neither a memorial nor Wikinews. Stifle (talk) 21:17, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 14:34, 9 July 2007 (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.
