Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tali Hatuel (2nd nomination)

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 all, for now. No consensus to delete all of these articles so: Suggesting a re nomination of these articles, but individually . SynergeticMaggot (talk) 00:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tali Hatuel

Tali Hatuel (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

WP:ONEEVENT ("If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography is unlikely to be warranted.") and WP:NOT#MEMORIAL are the main issues here. Nominating several casualties of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (also Ayala Abukasis, Rachel Levy, George Khoury and Faris Odeh). None of them are notable outside the circumstances of their deaths, and the precedent is in the deletion of Jihad Shaar, another victim. Note that I have nominated both Israeli and Palestinian victims together to avoid the kind of hypocricy that saw at least one editor vote to keep this article last time, but to delete Jihad Shaar). пﮟოьεԻ 57 20:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

(Note, I removed my comment which was intended for the listing on Faris Odeh, not here. Number 57 you seem to have cross-linked the AfDs for these two. Please repair it so that others don't make the same mistake I did. Thanks. Tiamut^talk 00:32, 21 March 2008 (UTC))

It's a multiple AfD (WP:BUNDLE) - I'm trying to get all the articles deleted at once. I'm afraid that doing them one-by-one would lead to the various POV pushers piling in on certain sides, so it's better to do a "mixed" one as they are all effectively the same kind of article and no-one can say keep the Israeli ones but delete the Palestinian ones or vice versa. пﮟოьεԻ 57

I'm not sure bundling these articles together is appropriate as they don't cover the same subject matter and while they are all people who were killed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that's where the similarities end, except for in the case of Ayat al-Akhras and Rachel Levy whom Eleland mentions below as possibly being appropriate for merger). Tiamut^talk 01:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, but I still want to direct my comment primarily to only one of the articles. I hope that's okay.

Keep Faris Odeh. Per my original post: I don't know the names of the other people mentioned, including Jihad Shaar, (except for Tali Hatuel whom if I recall correctly was a less than 1 year old baby killed by Palestinian gunfire). About Faris Odeh, the subject of this AfD debate, I can say that WP:ONEEVENT doesn't apply. His image still appears ubiquituously in Palestinian poster art and his name was referenced multiple times after his death by Yasser Arafat. He has been called a "symbol of the Palestinian resistance", so we're not talking about the passive victim of a one time event, but rather a popular icon in Palestinian circles and a well-recognized image around the world (the image of him throwing a rock at a tank was published worldwide in mainstream papers around the world at the time, and as I said has been republished numerous times since. Additionally, the image wasn't taken at the time of his death, so I don't think on-time event really applies.) Other editors are free to check out the sources in the article which establish these facts. If someone requires additional sourcing or more recent examples of his continued popularity as a symbol of the Palestinian struggle, do let me know. I'd be happy to oblige. Tiamut^talk 00:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Faris Odeh. I didn't know the name, but I know the photograph, and I know it's an iconic image around the world. The proposed BLP1E standard here would force us to delete Tank Man as well... come on. <eleland/talkedits> 00:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep George Khoury. Needs inline citations, but being eulogized and claimed as a martyr by both the Israeli MFA and the Palestinian Authority is notable. <eleland/talkedits> 01:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Ayala Abukasis, no real claim of notability beyond having been murdered, very little coverage in RS's. <eleland/talkedits> 01:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Merge Rachel Levy with Haim Smadar and Ayat al-Akhras to an article about the bombing. None of the three are notable outside the context of the bombing so it makes more sense to cover them together. <eleland/talkedits> 01:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
  • General comment on the bundling process: I don't approve of it. There appears to be a wide disparity in notability here, but I feel - as I'm apparently intended to - like I'm going to be called an antisemite for voting "inconsistently." Odeh was called "The poster boy for Palestinian defiance [...] a Palestinian legend" by the Washington Post in an article solely about him. There's just no comparable notability for somebody like Abukasis. <eleland/talkedits> 01:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Close AfD without any decisions other than closure per WP:BUNDLE. The bundled articles are clearly not as close to each other as the examples given at the template and it also states that "[i]f any of the articles you are considering for bundling could stand on its own merits, then it should be nominated separately. Or to put it more succinctly, if you are unsure of whether to bundle an article or not, don't." I see here plenty of objections to this or that nomination, already making this grouped AfD a huge mess. The best way to nominate somewhat similar cases is an AfD for each article, with "see also" links to the other articles just under the nomination. See here for an example Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24/24 World Concert. gidonb (talk) 01:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Faris Odeh - He is on poster everywhere in the East Jerusalem and Ramallah when I visited so clearly he must be a symbol for Palestinian resistance (I know my statement could be OR though). The article, however, is well-referenced and explains in detail (with sources) that he is a symbol of Palestinian resistance. --Al Ameer son (talk) 03:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete George Khoury. He was an Arab victim of a shooting by another Arab, which apparently was accidental and thats the main reason he's attained some notoriety. Also it could be because he was a Christian, I'm not sure. --Al Ameer son (talk) 03:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Close and keep as a bundle. Renominate individually if desired. it's obvious that the different people here have different degrees of notability. casualties of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are not to be assumed all of equivalent importance. Frankly, considering them together this way seems to be as lacking in ethnic sensitivity.DGG (talk) 03:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Comment People voting keep for Faris Odeh claim that “I know the photograph, and I know it's an iconic image around the world” or “He is on poster everywhere in the East Jerusalem and Ramallah when I visited so clearly he must be a symbol for Palestinian resistance.” However, it should be noted the article is about him, yet it is the image which seems to be important here. Tank Man and Falling man are about a certain image, not about the person who features in it. Faris Odeh would be like any of the other victims if not for the photo. Therefore if the article is to be retained it should be renamed and sources found for it notability as a notable photograph. Chesdovi (talk) 12:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I would support the articles being converted to articles about the incidents themselves, but not left as pieces on the individuals. пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I like this suggestionThomas Babbington (talk) 20:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Thomas Babbington

• • The case of Odeh is not analogous to the other two cases, as "Tank Man's" identity is unknown, and "Falling Man" was famous before he was identified. I agree that the article should be about the photograph and the circumstances around it, but I don't know of any name for the photograph - we could call it something like Palestinian child throwing stone at tank photograph but it doesn't seem right per WP:OR to just make up a name like that. <eleland/talkedits> 14:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

We would have to find a good source which gives the image a name, as in Child with Toy Hand Grenade in Central Park and the christies link. Chesdovi (talk) 02:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• Keep all, because the nominator should have sought greater WP:CONSENSUS such as at the obvious places like at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel and Wikipedia:Notice board for Israel-related topics or perhaps even at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Middle Eastern military history task force to get some professional editorial input before nominating articles such as these that are literally from the hottest of war-zones the Israeli-Palestinian conflict where every edit has the potential to stir up edit wars and bitterness, as a move that is bound to be disputed and cause controversy. This nomination was hasty and flies in the face of the recommendations at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to list multiple related pages for deletion and AfD footer (multiple) such as: (a) "... for group nominations it is often a good idea to only list one article at afd and see how it goes, before listing an entire group." (b) "If any of the articles you are considering for bundling could stand on its own merits, then it should be nominated separately." (c) "... to put it more succinctly, if you are unsure of whether to bundle an article or not, don't." Finally, the nominator is grievously overlooking something very important, that in this age of close media scrutiny of events, victims take on far more symbolic value, and it is not the same as making "WP:NOT#MEMORIALS" because just as Rachel Corrie, Brian Avery, Tom Hurndall, James Miller (filmmaker) get their own articles (and no-one calls them "MEMORIAL articles") because they are symbolic of far greater political, military, ethnic and religious issues, so too do the others. Perhaps there may be better ways to gather up and regroup such articles, but even when soccer teams get articles, all their players and even their managers get their own articles as well, so this is no different, and there are far fewer victims of this war than there are soccer players in the world! But to repeat, the nominator should have sought out greater consensus before wading into this area of hot dispute which he must have known would not be well-received with the potential for violating WP:POINT and WP:NOT#BATTLEGROUND. Let's take these articles off the table and talk a lot first to build consensus. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 09:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

As noted in the intro, I nominated the articles together to avoid a WP:NOT#BATTLEGROUND situation, in particular one in which certain editors would hypocritically choose to delete one and keep the other depending upon their POV. Even if WP:NOT#MEMORIAL doesn't apply, WP:ONEEVENT still does. Like I said above, if someone wants to convert the articles to something about the event rather than the person, I would be happy to withdraw the nomination. пﮟოьεԻ 57 11:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Number57, but WP:ONEEVENT definitely does not apply in the case of Faris Odeh. The image of him and the courage he exhibits in it are widely recognized as symbols of Palestinian resistance. The suggestion by other editors that we should not use his name as the title of the article isn't a valid one, since his name is itself is invoked and remembered, and not just the picture. And his biographical background was also widely discussed and so should be covered. I suggest that you withdraw this nomination since as many others point out here, WP:BUNDLE has not been properly applied. Please consider nominating each individual article using the group format that links to similar such articles, as an alternative that would allow for you to point out these articles in context without tying their fate to one another. Thanks. Tiamut^talk 11:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Sadly there is no point in separate nominations. Even though this AfD is clearly going to fail, I'll let it run it's course because at least it's generating some comment. пﮟოьεԻ 57 11:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• Automatic keep all, per gidonb and IZAK. The articles may be vaguely similar in many ways, and I appreciate the good intention of nominating them all together to avoid POV pushing, but this is clearly not a case of appropriate bundling in an AfD. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 11:22, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep without prejudice. Per WP:BUNDLE, individual AFDs may be needed for each if deemed necessary. JFW | T@lk 12:22, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep all all of them are notable for their deaths, and the group nomination is not the best way to handle this. Seems more like an attempt at WP:POINT. Yahel Guhan 13:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep all, at least based on this "bundled" nomination. I do not think the bundling is reasonable, as each article should be considered on its own merits. At least three, Tali Hatuel, Ayala Abukasis and George Khoury, are clearly notable. (I have not read the others.) That is to say, the information in the articles is notable. If appropriate names can be found for the events, an argument could be made that the names of the victims (or in one case, the perpetrator) should be turned into redirects. Failing that, the articles should be kept. In no event should they (meaning, at least these three) simply be deleted. 6SJ7 (talk) 15:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
• Close AfD with no decision and renominate each article individually as per gidonb's recommendation. BWH76 (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep All These incidents not only made headlines, they continue to resonate. When a new atrocity occurs, there is sometimes a desire to recall previous, similar incidents. Keeping them all enables this information to be retrieved. And each of these was a human life. Surely we can spare them a few square inches of cyberspace.Thomas Babbington (talk) 20:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Thomas Babbington
• Keep Them All It seems so,er, ghoulish to decide which murder victim is "worthy" pf a Wikipedia page. And especially immoral to argue that wehn a death is celebrated with posters it becomes more worthy of inclusion thatn the equally tragic death of a murder victim whose death was not exploited for political gain with martyr posters.MercyOtis (talk) 22:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)MercyOtis

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.