Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2023 October 27.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 17:01, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Clear case of WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Nominating this for AfD alongside List of Israeli civilian casualties in the Second Intifada and List of Palestinian civilian casualties in the Second Intifada. Any individual events can be added to the respective Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict year-by-year event list. Longhornsg (talk) 19:52, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Terrorism, Israel, and Palestine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:02, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (all three): These pages are indeed all examples of what is discourage by WP:NOTMEMORIAL writ large, stringing together events without sufficient notability to have had pages created about them. The appropriate place for notable or significantly covered events is indeed at one of the appropriate year-by-year timelines at Template:Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:46, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I closed this discussion as a Soft Deletion but I was asked to revert my closure and relist this AFD so that's what I am doing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:41, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Useful, detailed data on a well studied and scrutinized international conflict. All three pages need cleanup and removal of certain data to address WP:NOTAMEMORIAL concerns, but the pages should stay imo.Mistamystery (talk) 20:04, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but only the text. The tables listing each individual incident falls afoul of NOTMEMORIAL. On the fence about the gallery at the end. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:07, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gallery should definitely go, imo.

And honestly, I think a combined single timeline of incidents (also limited only to the conventional timeline of the intifada, which these days go past) would, i think, be a useful and insightful window into the civilian oriented violence timeline of the conflict.

Regarding the sources, while they are some of the most prominently present compilations of incidents, they are by no means primary or solitary sources for these events. Helpful, if not crucial guides to the total documented events, but pretty much every incident can be backed by secondary sources (and should be).

This wiki page has been referred to constantly across the internet for many years now, and its information (and not from the B’tselem or Foreign Ministry pages) has been linked to from many domains.. I think it’s dangerous territory to batch delete necessary collection work like this just because of pat redundancy concerns. There isn’t enough good faith effort to attempt to justify people’s actions, and I’m seeing far too many quick-trigger page deletion requests for my own comfort. Would really appreciate endless notes and attempts before we just clear pages like this out.

Mistamystery (talk) 20:27, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Second Intifada#Casualties. Most of the info is already duplicated there, but there are some stats that aren't. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:31, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per WP:PRESERVE. Information is too useful and reported by reliable sources. Also it's better to have both Israeli and Palestinian civilian casualties in a single article. I don't think this falls into WP:NOTMEMORIAL since names are not even mentioned, but only the attacks. Dovidroth (talk) 06:15, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

90% of the tables are just copy pastes of exactly two B'Tselem web pages ([1], [2]) and one Israeli ministry of foreign affairs page ([3] - also not a reliable source) that are all very much memorials. The resulting list here, which is predominantly composed of events that are not individually notable falls foul WP:NOTDIRECTORY even if not WP:NOTMEMORIAL, though taken as a whole, even without names these lists are still effectively a memorial. That the information is "useful" is not a policy-based argument for it to be kept. It is only here because it already exists out there on the internet at archive.org whose job it is to retain information. The suggestion above by Clarityfiend to simply delete the tables/lists and leave a stub of vaguely encyclopedic prose would ~~be ok too~~ not be of much worth either, see below. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:49, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete covered at the main article well enough currently; the topic might be notable enough for a split, but the coverage at the main article seems better to me so a TNT seems appropriate here. AryKun (talk) 15:36, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
True on that last point: the main page for the conflict already has better prose, so the prose here is also not particularly worth salvaging. So WP:TNT does indeed likely apply to that portion also. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:55, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:21, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.