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. A WP:SNOW close. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 03:32, 5 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Death and state funeral of George H. W. Bush (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)

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

The information covered in this article is not notable, because nothing historically or culturally significant happened at the funeral itself (unlike say at Death and state funeral of Joseph Stalin). The info in here can just be in the death section of George H.W. Bush. The vast majority of articles about the death and state funerals of politicians cover events which were not inherently notable, with the only notability being secondary because the subject was notable - unlike the Josef Stalin one - in which many victims of his cult of personality died in a human crush at his funeral. Additionally, most death and state funeral articles are about Western politicians. I don't think we should have and keep adding articles about the deaths + state funerals of Western politicians when nothing significant happened because of these events, considering we usually don't do that for non-Western politicians. A lot of other non-Western politicians also leave a notable metaphysical impact on the world through the policies they implement, and since their time in office usually defines why they're notable - not the aftermath of their death - the same principle should apply to Western politicians. Important info about his death and funeral is already covered in George H. W. Bush#Death and funeral, so including it here again is repetitive, and the rest is just excess which isn’t notable. So it should just be deleted, there's nothing of substance here which isn’t in the original article, therefore merging isn’t necessary Stephanie921 ( talk) 21:56, 3 September 2022 (UTC) reply

The assertion that there's nothing of substance here which isn’t in the original article is utter nonsense. Even in the lead I found two points of substance:

1. President Donald Trump declared a national day of mourning and ordered all flags "throughout the United States and its Territories and possessions" lowered to half staff for 30 days after his death
2. About a dozen world leaders attended the event

I started on the next para, but there was so much detail on his final days that isn't in the main article that it was too much work to copy it all.

It seems that the nominator did not even read the article before making this nomination. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 13:05, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2022 September 3. — ^{cyberbot I} _{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:39, 3 September 2022 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Events, and Texas. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:49, 3 September 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep. State funerals are rare events, usually attended by world leaders and that receive significant media coverage. I'd be happy to see such articles about state funerals for non-Western former heads of state that receive similar coverage. That argument seems to be other stuff doesn't exist. 331dot ( talk) 22:45, 3 September 2022 (UTC) reply

My main concern is that the subject is not by itself notable. The notability all comes from Bush himself, not the acc death and funeral. The article about Bush already covers it concisely as it pertains to him, and the media coverage all stem from his legacy @ User:331dot Stephanie921 ( talk) 23:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC) reply

This article has existed for four years without a problem. It covers much more detailed information than the one paragraph in the article about Bush himself. Adding this all to that article would make it too long. "The media coverage all stem from his legacy", yes, that happens with heads of state. If he were a nobody, his funeral would likely not warrant an article. 331dot ( talk) 23:52, 3 September 2022 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Highly notable event, with extensive WP:SIGCOV. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 04:39, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep. State funerals of world leaders are generally notable. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 08:05, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Mountains of coverage here, not just from the U.S. either. Too much to cram into the main article. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 ( talk) 08:11, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep, suggest SNOW close – With extensive international coverage, easily passes WP:NEVENT. Ovinus ( talk) 15:48, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply
• Related discussion: WP:Articles for deletion/Death of Mikhail Gorbachev. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:57, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep per above Andre 🚐 18:43, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep This AfD nomination was likely not started because of the merits of Death and state funeral of George H. W. Bush itself, but rather because the page was mentioned by !voters at the deletion nomination of Death and funeral of Mikhail Gorbachev as an example of precedent for such articles existing on the encyclopedia, while the nom's stated opinion is that "Death and funeral of <x>" articles are inherently non notable. Notability is determined by sources, and this article's sourcing demonstrates that this event was extensively covered. The topic is also significant enough that it passed an ITN/C discussion and was featured on the front page of the encyclopedia for a time. There's more than enough information here to justify a page separate from the biographical article George H. W. Bush. In my opinion, it's not a great practice to start new AfD discussions just to make a point at another AfD discussion. Maybe if the Gorbachev one closed with a consensus to delete (which looks very unlikely) then there'd be a better case for nominating other ones, but right now this feels a bit POINTy.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:24, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply

  Meh, this isn't super disruptive and it's a reasonable question, although it might have been be better discussed at some place like Wikipedia talk:Notability (events). I'd suggest a snow close, though. Ovinus ( talk) 19:43, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply

• Keep, the article includes details that would not be included in the main article due to it being too long, so I see no reason for the page to be deleted. Sahaib ( talk) 20:39, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep I would have WP:SNOW closed this myself, but to some extent am involved given my contribution at WP:Articles for deletion/Death of Mikhail Gorbachev. FWIW, this article clearly passes the GNG and is an utterly appropriate fork. Regards, -- Goldsztajn ( talk) 23:22, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep - obviously, if only because this is a completely valid content fork so as to avoid overwhelming the parent article with undue coverage of his death and funeral. Silly nom imo. nableezy - 00:10, 5 September 2022 (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.