- 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. The nominator raises plausible concerns about WP:SYNTH, but most of the participants believe that the sources do analyze the deaths as a collective whole. There are also concerns about quality, but not enough for a consensus to WP:TNT this article / return it to draftspace. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:22, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
2022 Russian mystery deaths
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- 2022 Russian mystery deaths ( | 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 article name is meaningless and generic, there is effectively no sourcing to tie any of these together, and has basically no content besides a table of red-linked names. Jon698 ( talk) 05:09, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- RIP the article was moved to draftspace right as I nominated it for deletion. 2022 Russian mystery fires should also be looked at. Jon698 ( talk) 05:10, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- I coincidentally draftified just as this AfD was created and I've reversed myself now. This was a really poor AfC accept in my opinion, with zero prose content actually discussing what reliable sources say about these so-called mystery deaths. If kept, this should be sent back to the draftspace gulag for more improvement (unless someone HEYMANNs it during this AfD). ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 05:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Russia. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:53, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep News items in reliable sources give evidence of WP:notabilityof the article’s subject, including citations in the article, and Moscow Times, [1] Warsaw Institute’s Russia Monitor, [2] the Independent, [3] Newsweek, [4] etcetera. Title is immaterial and can be changed. — Michael Z. 15:38, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- @
Mzajac: These are sources simply reporting on unsolved deaths. They make no connected conspiracy and there is nothing to expand this article with. It should be deleted and merged into
List of unsolved deaths.
Jon698 (
talk)
18:51, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- That is not correct. The sources do make connections: "In all cases, there are widespread suspicions that the deaths may have been staged as suicides" "Gazprom’s security agency is investigating into all deaths." "direct or indirect links to the Kremlin" "the executives knew a lot about the company’s financial flow" Are all connections stated in the linked sources. 21:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Cgbuff (
talk)
21:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- The sourced arguments against such connections should be included as well of course. Cgbuff ( talk) 21:23, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- That is patent nonsense. The sources link these specific deaths in at least three countries. — Michael Z. — Michael Z. 03:04, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- That is not correct. The sources do make connections: "In all cases, there are widespread suspicions that the deaths may have been staged as suicides" "Gazprom’s security agency is investigating into all deaths." "direct or indirect links to the Kremlin" "the executives knew a lot about the company’s financial flow" Are all connections stated in the linked sources. 21:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Cgbuff (
talk)
21:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- @
Mzajac: These are sources simply reporting on unsolved deaths. They make no connected conspiracy and there is nothing to expand this article with. It should be deleted and merged into
List of unsolved deaths.
Jon698 (
talk)
18:51, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Wikipedia:Introduction_to_deletion_process: "Remember that deletion is a last resort. Deletion nominations rarely improve articles, and deletion should not be used as a way to improve an article, or a reaction to a bad article. It is appropriate for articles which cannot be improved." I think it is an important article. It must be improved. Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_in_deletion_discussions#Poorly_written_article That does not support deletion. The name can be changed maybe. What would a better name be? There are many good reliable sources. Are there opposing sources that there is no connection? Would be good to add a controversy section on that, if so, but I have not found any. Cgbuff ( talk) 17:48, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comment This is a genuine subject that has been discussed on some cable news channels. The lack of a named conspiracy has to do with the fact that these deaths are very recent and the lack of a free press in Russia that could investigate this. I have no sources to offer so I won't "vote" but I wanted to confirm that these "mystery deaths" have been a subject of discussion, at least in TV journalism, since Spring 2022. Liz Read! Talk! 01:36, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- If it ends up kept, it will need to go back to the draftspace, unless someone expands it in the meantime. - Vipz ( talk) 05:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TigerShark ( talk) 03:04, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:42, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. This may be a conspiracy theory but it's getting lots of coverage in top tier media publications. Chagropango ( talk) 07:51, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. The nominator raises plausible concerns about WP:SYNTH, but most of the participants believe that the sources do analyze the deaths as a collective whole. There are also concerns about quality, but not enough for a consensus to WP:TNT this article / return it to draftspace. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:22, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
2022 Russian mystery deaths
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- 2022 Russian mystery deaths ( | 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 article name is meaningless and generic, there is effectively no sourcing to tie any of these together, and has basically no content besides a table of red-linked names. Jon698 ( talk) 05:09, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- RIP the article was moved to draftspace right as I nominated it for deletion. 2022 Russian mystery fires should also be looked at. Jon698 ( talk) 05:10, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- I coincidentally draftified just as this AfD was created and I've reversed myself now. This was a really poor AfC accept in my opinion, with zero prose content actually discussing what reliable sources say about these so-called mystery deaths. If kept, this should be sent back to the draftspace gulag for more improvement (unless someone HEYMANNs it during this AfD). ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 05:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Russia. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:53, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep News items in reliable sources give evidence of WP:notabilityof the article’s subject, including citations in the article, and Moscow Times, [1] Warsaw Institute’s Russia Monitor, [2] the Independent, [3] Newsweek, [4] etcetera. Title is immaterial and can be changed. — Michael Z. 15:38, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- @
Mzajac: These are sources simply reporting on unsolved deaths. They make no connected conspiracy and there is nothing to expand this article with. It should be deleted and merged into
List of unsolved deaths.
Jon698 (
talk)
18:51, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- That is not correct. The sources do make connections: "In all cases, there are widespread suspicions that the deaths may have been staged as suicides" "Gazprom’s security agency is investigating into all deaths." "direct or indirect links to the Kremlin" "the executives knew a lot about the company’s financial flow" Are all connections stated in the linked sources. 21:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Cgbuff (
talk)
21:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- The sourced arguments against such connections should be included as well of course. Cgbuff ( talk) 21:23, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- That is patent nonsense. The sources link these specific deaths in at least three countries. — Michael Z. — Michael Z. 03:04, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- That is not correct. The sources do make connections: "In all cases, there are widespread suspicions that the deaths may have been staged as suicides" "Gazprom’s security agency is investigating into all deaths." "direct or indirect links to the Kremlin" "the executives knew a lot about the company’s financial flow" Are all connections stated in the linked sources. 21:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Cgbuff (
talk)
21:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- @
Mzajac: These are sources simply reporting on unsolved deaths. They make no connected conspiracy and there is nothing to expand this article with. It should be deleted and merged into
List of unsolved deaths.
Jon698 (
talk)
18:51, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Wikipedia:Introduction_to_deletion_process: "Remember that deletion is a last resort. Deletion nominations rarely improve articles, and deletion should not be used as a way to improve an article, or a reaction to a bad article. It is appropriate for articles which cannot be improved." I think it is an important article. It must be improved. Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_in_deletion_discussions#Poorly_written_article That does not support deletion. The name can be changed maybe. What would a better name be? There are many good reliable sources. Are there opposing sources that there is no connection? Would be good to add a controversy section on that, if so, but I have not found any. Cgbuff ( talk) 17:48, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comment This is a genuine subject that has been discussed on some cable news channels. The lack of a named conspiracy has to do with the fact that these deaths are very recent and the lack of a free press in Russia that could investigate this. I have no sources to offer so I won't "vote" but I wanted to confirm that these "mystery deaths" have been a subject of discussion, at least in TV journalism, since Spring 2022. Liz Read! Talk! 01:36, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- If it ends up kept, it will need to go back to the draftspace, unless someone expands it in the meantime. - Vipz ( talk) 05:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TigerShark ( talk) 03:04, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:42, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. This may be a conspiracy theory but it's getting lots of coverage in top tier media publications. Chagropango ( talk) 07:51, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
- 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.