Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/2016 Malmö Muslim community centre arson: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:24, 30 July 2017 editPincrete (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers51,239 edits →2016 Malmö Muslim community centre arson← Previous edit Revision as of 15:25, 30 July 2017 edit undoTheGracefulSlick (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers53,686 edits →2016 Malmö Muslim community centre arson: ClosingTags: Mobile edit Mobile web editNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
===]=== ===]===
<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|S}}
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''keep'''. Nomination withdrawn. (]) ] (]) 15:25, 30 July 2017 (UTC)


:{{la|2016 Malmö Muslim community centre arson}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks"></span>) :{{la|2016 Malmö Muslim community centre arson}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks"></span>)
Line 7: Line 13:
* Pinging editors from the prior AfD and talk page discussion: {{u|E.M.Gregory}}, {{u|Pincrete}}, {{u|CrispyGlover}}, {{u|Yellow Diamond}}, {{u|BabbaQ}}, {{u|Julle}}, and {{u|Sjö}}. Please focus your comments on the notability of this article now that some clean-up was directed. Anyone else is, of course, free to contribute.] (]) 00:51, 29 July 2017 (UTC) * Pinging editors from the prior AfD and talk page discussion: {{u|E.M.Gregory}}, {{u|Pincrete}}, {{u|CrispyGlover}}, {{u|Yellow Diamond}}, {{u|BabbaQ}}, {{u|Julle}}, and {{u|Sjö}}. Please focus your comments on the notability of this article now that some clean-up was directed. Anyone else is, of course, free to contribute.] (]) 00:51, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
::*Ping {{u|TheGracefulSlick}}, a highly experienced creator of AfD discussions, to format this page properly so that the recent AfD appears in the usual box at top of discussion.] (]) 10:40, 30 July 2017 (UTC) ::*Ping {{u|TheGracefulSlick}}, a highly experienced creator of AfD discussions, to format this page properly so that the recent AfD appears in the usual box at top of discussion.] (]) 10:40, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
:::* {{u|E.M.Gregory}} I received an e-mail last night giving me advice about your type of "editing". The moral of the it all: if users want to kill policies, let them; if they want to misrepresent sources at AfD to fabricate a case, let them. Basically, just focus on myself. So here's your '''speedy keep'''. While you're at it, please stop calling me Slick.] (]) 15:25, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
*'''Note''' - Here is the prior AfD: ].] (]) 00:50, 29 July 2017 (UTC) *'''Note''' - Here is the prior AfD: ].] (]) 00:50, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' The coverage is, in my mind, a little more than just news - it is mentioned, as EM Gregory pointed out previously, in many articles written a while after the fact.--] <font color="yellow">Δ</font>] 04:03, 29 July 2017 (UTC) * '''Keep''' The coverage is, in my mind, a little more than just news - it is mentioned, as EM Gregory pointed out previously, in many articles written a while after the fact.--] <font color="yellow">Δ</font>] 04:03, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:25, 30 July 2017

2016 Malmö Muslim community centre arson

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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:25, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

2016 Malmö Muslim community centre arson (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)

I feel in the prior AfD, everyone was distracted by the pressing issues of POV and WP:SYNTH which prevented a meaningful discussion of the notability of the article. Technically, this article still has issues because the person responsible was cleared of all charges, including arson -- making the title incorrect. Regardless, for a fire that caused minimal damage (smoked-stained windows and walls) and no casualties, there isn't any WP:LASTING societal impact. There is no WP:INDEPTH analysis and the brief blimps in the news reeks of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:ROUTINE. Trump's list can also not be used to establish significant coverage since it merely mentions the incident with 77 other attacks and according to Swedish courts this wasn't terror or arson. Most sources are now outdated or incorrect, an issue that happens with news-inspired articles. There isn't anything to merge since officially no crime ever occurred.

  • E.M.Gregory I received an e-mail last night giving me advice about your type of "editing". The moral of the it all: if users want to kill policies, let them; if they want to misrepresent sources at AfD to fabricate a case, let them. Basically, just focus on myself. So here's your speedy keep. While you're at it, please stop calling me Slick.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:25, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Yellow Diamond thank you for revisiting this. I hope you realize merely mentioning an event existed does not make it notable. I urge you to read my rationale above and the corresponding policies. Most of the sources are not reliably reporting the incident and are, in fact, WP:ROUTINE news coverage. If you can distinguish a significant WP:LASTING impact (the Trump list is out since it is a passing mention and incorrect) or post-analysis that confirms WP:INDEPTH, I will happily withdraw this nomination.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 04:29, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU 09:24, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 09:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep - the coverage of this event goes beyond the day it happened. This goes beyond NOTNEWS. A previous AfD was concluded less than a month ago, POV pushingusually does not result in anything.BabbaQ (talk) 12:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:34, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
  • This is a highly POV nomination, which follows a highly POV rewrite of the article by editor Pincrete. WP:HEY, I have cleaned the article up, to make the facts, chronology and context clear. Note in particular that a suspect was cleared at trial for insufficient evidence. But that after the verdict was handed down, investigators in Germany arrested an ISIS operative making role of ISIS and guilt of suspect clear.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:50, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Another key fact removed from the article is the fact that perp was not released after being acquitted. WP:HEY I have now added sourced description of his transfer fromm police to security services after the trial concluded to be investigated for ties to ISIS.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep This s the 1.) First terrorist attack by the Islamic State on Swedish soil. 2.) The fact that perp was acquitted is irrelevant because article was written after the acquittal when the arrest of a ISIS operative in Germany produced dramatic new evidence about the ISIS connection to this attack. Notability comes largely from the ISIS connection, 3.) Suspect was transferred form Police custody to custody of Swedish Security Services to be investigated for ties to ISIS when trial ended, even before the new evidence surfaced in Germany, and 4.) evidence about the connection between ISIS operative "Mohammad G." and the Malmo perp has provided new information on the way ISIS incites and confirms attacks that makes the events in this article significant not simply as an attack in Sweden, but as pert of a far larger body of work by investigators, terrorism analysts, and students of radicalization working to understand how jihad groups like ISIS instigate crimes.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:16, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
What you call my 'very PoV edit' had the support of every editor that looked at your sources E.M.Gregory. Your statements that the new 'German' arrest proves anything other than an ISIS reporter have no one's support and have been removed. Proper place to discuss content is talk page. If you want to write an article about the German arrest, do so, not use this as a coatrack, but at the moment there is even less printed about it than about 'Malmo'. Pincrete (talk) 15:23, 30 July 2017 (UTC)