Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Environmental impact of the Red Sea crisis

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 Merge to MV Rubymar or Red Sea crisis‎. A consensus on target is does not require an extension of this AfD. Star Mississippi 02:11, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental impact of the Red Sea crisis

[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)

A pointless fork of content that's already in the MV Rubymar article where the environmental impact should be discussed. Step hen 01:57, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Geography, and Yemen. Shaws username . talk . 02:08, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Technically speaking, this article was around nearly 18 hours before the MV Rubymar (03:41, 24 February 2024‎ for this articles creation compared to 21:39, 24 February 2024‎ (MV Rubymar’s creation), which means that MV Rubymar would be the “pointless fork of content”. Nonetheless, for an AFD, this does not need to be deleted. I would maybe consider a redirect in the future, but not for an AfD, when timestamps prove this was the first of the two articles. RM should have been used, not AfD. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 02:23, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Environment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per WeatherWriter Abo Yemen ✉ 12:02, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to MV Rubymar. At this point there is no need for a separate article for the oil spill from the MV Rubymar. Splitting would be okay if there are other aspects covered but those can also be merged to Red_Sea_crisis#Impact. Reywas92^Talk 16:16, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Red Sea crisis or MV Rubymar. There's no reason for this to have its own article independently of these per WP:NOPAGE and WP:WHENSPLIT. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to MV Rubymar, or Red Sea crisis at a later date if other impacts than one ship are discussed with actual impact references rather than speculation. Step hen 21:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Red Sea crisis. It's too short to be its own article, the other article already delves into environmental impact of the crisis. However, if environmental impacts are further discussed in the future of this war, then it would be appropriate to have its own article RamHez (talk) 14:07, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as suggested. It can always be re-created later. Bearian (talk) 19:57, 7 March 2024 (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.