Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Newry car bombing

Add links
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 no consensus. Seems to be relatively equal weight and proportionality of comments for delete/merge or keep, with some significant viewpoints of value with respect to both. -- Cirt (talk) 11:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Newry car bombing

[edit]
2010 Newry car bombing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I prodded this under WP:NOTNEWS with the rationale:

Fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT - no deaths, and no demonstrated historical significance. All news reports are from either the event or the day of the arrest. More Wikinews content.

An editor changed the article a little and contested the PROD but did not, IMO, address the concerns in my PROD. Article is a news story about a horrible event - but there does not seem to be anything to show an enduring notability. All sources are written from the time of the event or at the time of the arrest. To prove my point the one retrospective source, written several months after the event, mentions the incident in 2 lines.... that is not enduring notability :)

The right place for this content is some sort of list or overview article. Errant [tmorton166] (chat!) 17:03, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - Have the kindness to read the article and sources before making assertions in deletion debates. Contrary to the assertions that "All news reports are from either the event or the day of the arrest." and contrary to assertions that "there does not seem to be anything to show an enduring notability" This article, which is on the page, [1], and which was written months after the event, puts the event in the historical context of a spate of terrorist attacks in 2009-10 that we must all hope represent the last years of "hardline Republican" terrorism.AMuseo (talk) 17:43, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Amuseo, I did read the article, thanks, and in fact in line with my AFGD nom policy I made at least a half hour search for sourcing material, with no luck. The source you highlight I already touched on, it supports my point. The article you references is not about the event - it mentions it as a recent event, in a couple of lines. That is all. The content that was sourced from that link was predominatly synth - or at the very least stretching the source to breaking point --Errant [tmorton166] (chat!) 18:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This comment reflects the nom's failure to do a good-faith search of sources beyond those found in the article. An AFD is supposed to be about ongoing notability, in the case of a recent event, notability is reflected by ongoing soverage and discussion and analysis of the event. Which this bombing has had in spades. It is inappropriate for an experienced editor to nominate an article for deletion without forst doing a google search and reading some of the articles such a search turns up.AMuseo (talk) 18:54, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - News story, not a historical event. —Carrite, Sept. 26, 2010.
  • Merge - To The Troubles in Newry, one of those ubiquitous lists for towns in Northern Ireland, affected by The Troubles. WikiuserNI (talk) 17:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Arguments for deletion above are based on a misapplication or misunderstanding of NOTNEWS which in intended to screen out articles on routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities. Politically-motivated bombings by militants who are part of a large, organized campaign of political violence are not routine news. A WP:CONS has evolved under which individual acts of political terrorism are considered WP:Notable.[2] This attack qualifies for Wikipedia under Wikipedia:Notability (events) because it received extensive international coverage.[3]. Finally, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. [4] "Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, which means that there is no practical limit to the number of topics we can cover or the total amount of content. ... A rule of thumb for creating a Wikipedia article is ... the scope of reporting (national or global reporting is preferred). ... Events are ... very likely to be notable if they have widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources..."—Preceding unsigned comment added by AMuseo (talk • contribs) 17:46, 26 September 2010 (UTC) [reply]
The event does not have widespread coverage. The notability guidelines are very specific in wanting historical or permanent significance; neither of which items this has. As I said, an article covering all events is the right place for this. While you are correct this is not a paper encyclopaedia that is not a license to dump a vast array of events with little historical significance - such a thing is pure noise and detracts from the significant material. We should aim for a comprehensive but clearly laid out encyclopaedia. --Errant [tmorton166] (chat!) 18:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. These are not the type of events alluded to in the unfortunately diffuse statements in WP:NOTNEWS. This has been clearly established by consensus in previous AfDs, and it's about time some examples of what goes and what doesn't are added to that guideline document to reduce the volume of unnecessary AfDs. __meco (talk) 18:24, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but it is exactly the sort of thing NOTNEWS is about. However if this is unclear would an RFC be appropriate --Errant [tmorton166] (chat!) 18:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Richard, you might be referring to WP:EVENT rather than NOTNEWS. The NOTENEWS policy insists that most news items are not relevant. WP:EVENT clearly states; Events that are only covered in sources published during or immediately after an event, without further analysis or discussion, are likely not suitable for an encyclopedia article. In this case the only coverage is immediately surrounding the event, and then immediately surrounding the event. Which does not satisfy the requirement for further analysis or discussion. --Errant [tmorton166] (chat!) 19:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep From [5] (cited within the article) "It was the first dissident car bomb in the North for 12 years", referring to Northern Ireland, where this type of violence had been fairly routine in the 70s, 80s and 90s. Except for that context, there would be no historical significance to this event that (fortunately) did not injure anyone. Mandsford 20:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article also noted a bomb attack the previous year on the policing board. WikiuserNI (talk) 20:48, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There have been many bombings and attempted bombings since 1998. This just happened to be the first successful car bombing for seven years (the last was on 22 August 2003). ~Asarlaí 17:56, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This was not a unique attack. There were over 10,000 bombings in NI between 1969 and 2001. There have been bombings since then, and there have been another three car bombings since the one in Newry. ~Asarlaí 17:56, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It may have been notable enough if it had happened in a city in Britain...but, in the context of Northern Ireland, it's not that notable. ~Asarlaí 17:56, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This argument is Wikipedia:Systemic bias, treating terror bombings differently because they happen in parts of the world that have suffered from many bombings is biased. This is not a paper encyclopedia. No harm is done in keeping an article that has had ongoing international coverage and that qualifies under WP:EVENT? But real harm is done is treating people in Northern Ireland as though threats to their lives are less important than threats to the lives of people in less troubled parts fo the world.AMuseo (talk) 18:43, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's not as notable because it's just one of the many bombings that have happened in NI since 1998. There have been three more car bombings since this one and they also continue to be mentioned in news articles. ~Asarlaí 18:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Source? I don;t disagree with that notability claim, but have yet to see a RS that makes such a distinct claim. --Errant [tmorton166] (chat!) 16:11, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There have been many bombings since 1998; this is just one of them. There have been another three car bombings since the one in Newry. ~Asarlaí 17:56, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This bobming was being widely cited in late September as an example of the operational capacity and intent to commit further acts of terrorism on the part of dissident Republican groups. I added a couple fo the references to the article, but a current news google search on newry court bombing turns up many more.AMuseo (talk) 15:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note To closing administrators puzzled by the existence of this AFD. I mentioned the Newry car bombing in AFD discussions about a bombing in Iraq, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/19 September 2010 Baghdad attacks ", asserting that Wikipedia:Systemic bias was involved because similar recent bombings in English-speaking countries are not nominated for deletion.
There appears to be WP:BIAS at work in attempts to delete articles about terrorist attacks in Iraq, when articles about terror attacks and attempted attacks in The United States and Britain are not deleted. See, for example, 2010 Newry car bombing.AMuseo (talk) 01:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Complete nonsense. That article has the same problems as this. Just no one has got to it yet. --Errant [tmorton166] (chat!) 11:35, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
User:tmorton immediately proposed this for deletion.
I am not asserting that this is relevant to the deletion debate. Only that the a Closing Administrator may be curious about the context of this debate.AMuseo (talk) 15:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just so. It got widespread coverage in addition to ongoing coverage and analysis. This is what notability is made of.AMuseo (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note this bombing is thought to have been an attack on the Hillsborough Castle Agreement. I am still adding to the article form the many sources that have discussed in in the months since it occurred, including several in this weeks news.AMuseo (talk) 18:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: As User:Mandsford quotes above, "It was the first dissident car bomb in the North [of Ireland] for 12 years". While some contributors have tried to argue that the news cycle disposed of this story quickly and attempted to use this to show lack of notability, we cannot rely on inattentive and easily distracted news editors to be our criterion for notability. The media often move on quickly. The first car bomb in 12 years is notable and historic, whatever the media does. A historic peace agreement was forged with numbing difficulty in Northern Ireland, and something as potentially devastating as a car bomb is a historic breach of the peace in a notable way; it is not a "minor" instance of post-terrorist gangsterism. It is true that many car bombs were detonated in Northern Ireland in the past—to the point of a grisly anonymity—but this one has the dubious distinction of being the first one after so long. It is a notable and worrying sign of endangered peace and is a prominent episode in a drawn-out history, not for large casualty figures or damage, but for what it indicates about the fragility of present Irish circumstances. --O'Dea (talk) 03:02, 4 October 2010 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2010_Newry_car_bombing&oldid=1069004422"