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
Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada. There is clear consensus that these articles should not exist in their present form or at their present title. There is consensus that encyclopedic information currently present in these articles should be merged into the parent article on overall civilian casualties. There is also consensus that an exhaustive list of every civilian casualty is not encyclopedic, but beyond that any decisions as to what content is preserved should be based on talk page consensus. Vanamonde (
Talk)23:46, 22 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong Oppose Both of these articles are crucial to the preservation of the parent article
Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada. Both of the articles in question being proposed for deletion have previously been restored by admins and further preserved following subsequent deletion requests.
Arguing (once again) these pages are crucial to understanding the specific detail and progress of violence toward civilians during one of the more well-studied and prominent conflicts of the early 21st century.
They are not crucial or less than crucial or relevant at all to the preservation of the article which they duplicate. This may involve a misunderstanding regarding transclusion. When the pages are merged, the content from both source pages that is transcluded will be added directly to the target page instead of being transcluded. Nothing will immediately change at the target. —
Alalch E.23:25, 4 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge+edit, or delete. Merge both to
Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada, and then turn "Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada" from a list into an article, or add "Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada" to this nomination and then delete all three. Either way, we don't need a list of civilian casualties in any conflict, per
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. We need articles about civilian casualties, that will link to articles about notable people who were civilian casualties, or notable events known for civilian casualties, and other topics related to civilian casualties.
Levivich (
talk)
23:02, 4 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Question: taking a cue from @
Iskandar323’s edit down of
List of Palestinian suicide attacks, what are thoughts on these pages (or single page if they’re merged) if they only contain prominently cited or reported upon casualty events? (Slash ones with already existing incident/event wiki pages)
Merge both to
Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada as bizzare examples of redundant copies that do absolutely nothing but duplicate corresponding sections in 'Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada'. After that is done, I agree that that page should be converted from list to prose as Levivich says.—
Alalch E.23:22, 4 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete both - including the listings at
Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada, and then create an actual summary of what sources say about Israeli and Palestinian civilian casualties in the second Intifada there. There is zero need for listing each and every single Israeli civilian death or for listing a subset of the Palestinian civilians deaths in an encyclopedia article. What is supposed to be there is a summary of what the sources say, not a regurgitation of a list one of them has. nableezy -
01:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Do you have any idea how long the latter list would be? And for what? Why cant we just summarize the topic in the article that isnt a list? nableezy -
22:17, 5 November 2023 (UTC)reply
As closer of one of the prior AfDs that went to DRV (as a n/c), I support this re-look at them. I'm not going to take a content position, however I think Nableezy's summary solution is the sanest way to handle this. It's not a sane path forward to have articles contingent (via transclusion) on others and it is unclear whether an A-Z listing is even helpful to the reader. StarMississippi01:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge both to
Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada (an article that just barely merits inclusion) per excellent logic presented by above. If merge is not accepted as the consensus, please place my !vote firmly in the delete column under WP:NOTMEMORIAL and NOTDB. There is simply no policy basis for these articles to have been created, and less for rescuing them from previous AfDs. Cheers,
Last1in (
talk)
15:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)reply
As one of the original people fighting to keep both pages, just want to clarify that one of the main reasons was because the Palestinian casualty page was woefully under-attended to and was painting a very imbalanced picture of casualties during this period. The Palestinian casualties during this period out pace Israeli ones at least 3-to-1, and most definitely wanted to put the work in on the Pal page to provide balanced attention.
Mistamystery (
talk)
00:25, 12 November 2023 (UTC)reply
I don’t have an issue with your position, it doesn’t seek to claim that only one people are worth covering here. I’m quite thankful that this was put up as a bundled nomination as it made it much easier for us to achieve a result that isn’t that nakedly POV. And it allows for seeing the juxtaposition in a vote that says Israeli victims should be covered in full, Palestinian victims shouldnt even be covered partially. Takes a certain, well I don’t even know what it takes tbh, to say that out loud. nableezy -
15:14, 12 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Not sure what the second half of your response is implying.
I didn't make these pages, I only ran into them when their deletion was being proposed (alongside a series of other deletion proposals all insisting that the event logs on the "timeline of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict" is sufficient to log these incidents, which I fully dispute as not remotely being so.
The conflict is unique and demands study and attention in detail - there is far too much unique phenomena and incident unique to this conflict to expert otherwise. I (personally) am concerned the efforts (by some at least) to try and remove these pages are part of an effort to obscure or make less visible certain aspects of the conflict.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I was going to close this as a Merge but considering how contested their AFDs/DRV have been, I'm relisting this discussion so that any rough consensus is absolutely clear...or as clear as matters on these subjects can ever be. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!23:48, 11 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete both per my reasoning the last time these were nominated. Are we going to start a "List of civilian casualties in during the Russian invasion of Ukraine" since we can find a news article for every individual drone strike on Kyiv? The parent article should be reworked into an actual analysis of civilian deaths as nableezy says.
AryKun (
talk)
17:25, 13 November 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.