Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ringsted terror plot

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. No consensus for a specific outcome has transpired herein. North America1000 07:54, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ringsted terror plot (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)

Not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia per WP:NOTNEWS. Hitro talk 03:07, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 05:19, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 05:19, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It has been nominated after 27 days of the creation. 4 weeks are literally more than "few days". WP:RAPID does not apply here. No reason for lasting notability can be found. Only project that can be considered for retainer is Wikinews. Hitro talk 08:34, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the source from two days ago that tells about the consequences of the incident [1] --Shrike (talk) 09:18, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: In addition meet WP:DIVERSE as multiple sources around the world that discuss the incident. --Shrike (talk) 09:52, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. Shrike (talk) 14:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Shrike (talk) 14:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 14:58, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 14:58, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Governments, the press and the world in general tend to regard the act of a government sending an assassination squad to operate clandestinely and MURDER several people in a foreign country as a pretty big deal. Even when, as here, the assassins sent by Iran are foiled before they carry out their mission.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:39, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your last comments seems to be original research and we shouldn't make a decision based on it.In addition I reviewed article and find afew independent valied sources that don't support the notability.As Wikipedia:Notability (events) nominated,It is recommended that editors start a section about the event within an existing article on a related topic if possible, which may later be split into its own article if the coverage suggests that the event is independently notable.Saff V. (talk) 07:59, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:SIGCOV If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list.. Since the topic has received in-depth coverage, the guideline is quite clear, editors should presume the topic is notable at this stage. NOTNEWS applies to . For example, routine news reporting of announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. This is not routine reporting on division three football. Europol is very likely to cover the plot in its annual TE SAT report on terrorism in Europe. AadaamS (talk) 06:47, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • With the incident being commented by the prime minister of Denmark, it has reached the highest political levels in a country. When an ambassador has been recalled, it has also had international repercussions. AadaamS (talk) 07:38, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 (talk) 15:52, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have received a message on my Talk page from TheGracefulSlick, urging me to review WP:NOTNEWS and change my vote. I do not appreciate this - it appears to be an attempt to keep the lobbying out of sight. I do not believe that WP:NOTNEWS applies: this incident and its repercussions are not routine. Also, I suggested in my vote that an alternative would be to merge this incident into an article with larger scope. I would expect any closer to review all keep, delete or other arguments and suggestions, and make an objective decision. RebeccaGreen (talk) 23:03, 10 December 2018 (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.
pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy