Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palestinian political violence

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 Keep Kotepho 19:00, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Palestinian political violence

Palmiro and Arre suggested back in March on the talk page that the article be deleted as it is biased, inaccurate, and just generally "absolute crap." Not much has changed. I suggest we delete the article and start a new one with the correct nomenclature of Palestinian terrorism. Wikipedia is not ruled by the EU. KI 14:38, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

We don't delete articles because they're biased. We delete them because they're not notable or original research or vanity or POV forks. Speedy keep.--Urthogie 14:49, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

• Keep this title. The idea that the term Palestinian Terrorism is somehow more neutral and less prejudicial that Palestinian Political Violence is utterly moronic. -- GWO

Delete, and delete almost-equally-bad Zionist political violence as well, and all articles created in order to show that group "x" or ideology "y" is evil. That said, this is my ideal vote, but several other people noted on the talk page that some or all of these articles had been nominated for deletion previously and survived. Nevertheless, even if other such articles survive, this one still doesn't deserve to exist. It combines factual inaccuracies with whopping POV and original research issues. I agree, however, with Gareth Owen that Palestinian Terrorism would not be an improvement. Palmiro | Talk 14:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Question: If the article is biased, why don't you edit it? If you don't like a sentance, discuss its modification or deletion the talk page. If you want a new sentance, add it and source it!----Urthogie 15:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep - This is a waste of time. --Irishpunktom\^talk 15:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep the article seems very complimentary to the Zionist political violence article. I've actually watched a documentary or two that made contentions that Zionists in effect launched the modern era of terrorism (against the British). That said I wouldn't be surprised to find this AfDed article needing work to render it more NPOV. Netscott 15:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. The content can be edited, or the page can be renamed. It doesn't seem reasonable that an encyclopedia should not have an article on this subject. Tom Harrison ^Talk 15:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

What is the subject? The article, as it stands, is trying to draw a historical parallel between political - and not-so-political - violence perpetrated by Palestinians across various different points in history, and it is full of bias and errors. As for Zionist political violence, it looks rather like it too was created to help prove that Zionists are evil. Wikipedia can certainly do without articles that only exist to prove a political point. Palmiro | Talk 15:59, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

The page has been named at various times, Palestinian terrorism, Palestinian political violence, Palestinian militancy, and Palestinian terrorism and militancy. What is the subject? It looks to me like it's Palestinian terrorism. I think that's a legitimate topic for an encyclopedia article, under whatever name. Tom Harrison ^Talk 20:42, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Especially since there is Zionist political violence. Merge into Violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? -Justin (koavf), talk 16:05, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep bias is no reason to delete; edit it. Carlossuarez46 20:21, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per most of the above. An article on Palestinian terrorism (e.g. against civilians) would also be fine, but not all violence is terrorism (e.g. against an occupying military). Or, at least that depends on your POV. So, there is room for an article of this title. Simply edit the contents to match the title. Brillig20 01:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per reason specified by Carlossuarez46. This is not the only article with doubted neutrality etc. Constanz - Talk 13:13, 17 April 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.