Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reactions to the 2016 Brussels bombings (2nd nomination)

Add links
Source: 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 Speedy keep per

WP:SKCRIT 2d, "an attempt to end an editing dispute through deletion, where dispute resolution is a more appropriate course", (non-admin closure) The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 23:30, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

Reactions to the 2016 Brussels bombings

AfDs for this article:
Reactions to the 2016 Brussels bombings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The previous AfD had strong support to delete the whole article, and others supporting trimming it down. All efforts to trim this have been reverted, so I'm bring this back to AfD. There is no encyclopedic purpose to publishing the condolances of the leader of East Timor or Botswana for an attack in Europe. Since we can't trim this, delete the whole thing and redirect the page to the perfectly adiquate section on reactions at 2016 Brussels bombings Legacypac (talk) 06:04, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to 2016 Brussels bombings. Considering that I copied the quotes to the article on Wikiquote, I don't think we can get away with outright deletion due to attribution of authors. Anyway, the Wikiquote article is almost up to scratch now and contains all of what was in here. Other than that, any prose could be easily merged into the main article from the revision history after redirect. For those arguing that these quotes should be kept as they are useful, why don't you just convert it to prose in the main article and then split it if it becomes too large at a later date? Jolly Ω Janner 06:12, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and close Totally
    WP:POINTY nom, seeing as the previous discussion was only closed a few days ago. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 06:43, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Probably best for an RfC on the talkpage, rather than this AfD. (Personal attack removed) Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 06:57, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Topic duplicates
2016 Brussels bombing AfD is the correct place for this discussion. Experienced editors know to comment on the topic, not other editors. Legacypac (talk) 07:01, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
You do have a long history of disruption, with frivolous ANI cases that you start when you don't get your way. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 07:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close, warn the nominator per
WP:POINT.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:01, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Redirect to 2016 Brussels bombings. Keep the info in one place. And most "reactions" are so flimsy that they are hardly notable, not everything what can be sourced is automatically notable. No need to list each and every bodies angry reaction. The Banner talk 09:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Im sorry, but I have to agree with
    WP:POINT here. It sounds like you are saying "Okay so since my edits to trim down have been reverted, back to AfD this goes" Have you tried an RfC on the talk-page on what to trim down? Have there been discussions held to reach an agreement? Looking at the talk-page I see Talk:Reactions to the 2016 Brussels bombings#Trimming international reactions please continue the discussion there. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 12:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:20, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:20, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:20, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:20, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:20, 14 April 2016 (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/Reactions_to_the_2016_Brussels_bombings_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1073184608"