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 and one is unlikely to form while their deaths are literally in the news. Suggest revisiting this when some time has passed and/or a potential merger target as it is unlikely to survice as a standalone once the initial wave of coverage has passed. Star Mississippi 14:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Murders of Lucy, Maia and Rina Dee

Murders of Lucy, Maia and Rina Dee (  | 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)

WP:NOTNEWS, this is a straight news article, with a single source likewise to a single news article. There is zero chance that a shooting that happened three days ago has attracted significant, sustained coveraged to show it to be a notable event. A 15 year old Palestinian was killed today, that is likewise a news article, not an encyclopedia article. This is already covered at Timeline_of_the_Israeli–Palestinian_conflict_in_2023#7_April, but this stand alone article fails WP:N and WP:NOTNEWS nableezy - 22:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Israel, and Palestine. Nableezy 22:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete I can't even find much news of it now, beyond mentioning it happened. Likely nothing will come of it, just another shooting that happens all too often in that part of the world. Oaktree b ( talk) 22:45, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete, pr nominator. Sad to say, but killings in Israel/Palestine is an (almost) everyday occurrence, and wp is WP:NOTNEWS, Huldra ( talk) 23:08, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete No different to many unfortunate deaths in the region. Fails WP:N and WP:NOTNEWS. Lard Almighty ( talk) 05:24, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep because this is a high-profile triple murder of civilians which is widely covered by the MSM in Israel & the UK. This is of a similar notability level to many of our articles about militant attacks in Israel & the West Bank in the 2020s. Like many articles it's a stub to start with, but it can be greatly improved. The Hebrew article is significantly longer & has several refs. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 08:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment: WP:OTHERSTUFF. Most articles about militant attacks deal with established notable events or the killings of notable people. These are non-notable people who sadly got caught up in a shooting. It will be around for the current news cycle. I doubt there will be enduring coverage. If there is and it becomes a notable event later it can be re-created, but for now it's just news and too soon. Lard Almighty ( talk) 08:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Many are, like this one, started as stubs hours or days after the event, have a similiar level of media coverage & are about attacks against civilians which have single figure death tolls. This being nominated very quickly when none of the others were makes no sense. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 09:30, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

As I say, WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a policy argument. Lard Almighty ( talk) 09:36, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep, per Jim Michael 2. Tombah ( talk) 08:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep. High-profile murder of three members of the same family. Plenty of media coverage worldwide. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 10:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  It's not murder. Death by firearm. We don't know why or who or how. Oaktree b ( talk) 22:17, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep, a horrific terrorist attack in which two sisters and her mother were murdered. This could have serious repercusions for the security situation. Reported by mainstream sources has a big deal in Israel, no reason to supress. And if we talk about comparisons, this article in which two random Palestinian gunmen were killed in Nablus doesn't seem particularly relevant. Dovidroth ( talk) 11:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  That should be deleted as well. re This could have, see WP:CRYSTAL. This is a news article, and it will pass in the next news cycle like all other news articles. nableezy - 22:59, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  It's not a question of "supressing" or indeed how horrific the attack was. It's a question of whether this article meets Wikipedia policy. So far I have seen no compelling policy arguments for inclusion at this time. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a news source. Lard Almighty ( talk) 11:45, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  We don't know it's terrorism, an accident or jusst a random shooting. There is no identified gunman/group/rogue shooter. "Girls get shot" isn't news we need in wiki. Oaktree b ( talk) 22:06, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

How could it be an accident? Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 15:54, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Suppression suggests pushing an agenda. We aren't here to help the "good guys". Leave agendas out of the discussion. If people in media deem it newsworthy, we'll review the sources and decide. People get shot all the time there, they all aren't notable. That's the issue. Oaktree b ( talk) 22:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep. The article now has six references from well-known news organizations in three countries. The death toll is higher than several other recent attacks which do have Wikipedia pages (see List of terrorist incidents in 2023), and the article has more and more diverse references than several of those articles, which begs the question of why someone would want to delete this page while leaving those. Ar2332 ( talk) 12:04, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  * Comment: If it's kept it should be renamed and focused on the attack, as those other articles are. They are about notable events, not the deaths of otherwise non-notable individuals. And again, WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a policy argument. Lard Almighty ( talk) 12:13, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

The media coverage is on the victims. It's not known who the gunman is & no group has claimed responsibility. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 13:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Just more reasons why it's WP:TOOSOON. There is no rush to get articles about events onto Wikipedia. It is often best to wait a while until things settle down after the initial understandable emotional reactions and we can have a better idea of what the encyclopaedic facts are. Lard Almighty ( talk) 14:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• None of the keep votes address that this is a blatant violation of WP:NOTNEWS. Not a single one of them. Beyond that, we dont title articles "Murder of" absent a conviction of murder. But if this is kept we can start making articles for every Palestinian murdered by an Israeli settler or soldier if you like. Unreal the level of myopic argument here. nableezy - 14:26, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

It's of similar notability as most of the attacks in recent years in Israel & the West Bank which have WP articles. This is a high-profile triple murder which is clearly far more notable than the vast majority of the ordinary killings of one person at a time. We have many articles about single & multiple murders in Israel & the West Bank, including some which include the victims' names. We have articles about unsolved murders elsewhere which have murder in their titles, including Murder of Yvonne Fletcher. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 15:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

That led to a siege of an embassy and the severing of diplomatic relations. This has led to what, a Wikipedia article? nableezy - 17:48, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

@ Jim Michael 2 again, your argument boils down to WP:OTHERSTUFF. The AfD process is not about counting votes, it's about the strength of the arguments made for and against deletion. I would be happy to change my mind on this but I would need to see solid policy-based arguments for inclusion to counter the ones I and others have made. Lard Almighty ( talk) 15:24, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

That's because it isn't. Which section of NOTNEWS do you think it violates? I'm assuming #2, but I don't think the worldwide coverage these killings have garnered violates that at all. It is merely your opinion that it does, not "blatant" in any way. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 15:56, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Of course it is, everything generates worldwide coverage. The raids on al-Aqsa have generated worldwide coverage, eg [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. The killing of the Palestinian boy yesterday has spawned worldwide coverage, eg [6], [7], [8]. Every act of violence in the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict generates coverage. But they are given their context, meaning within said long-running conflict, by including them in articles like Timeline_of_the_Israeli–Palestinian_conflict_in_2023. We only have this issue with Israeli victims of Palestinian violence, in which one creates an article in the hours and days after without having the faintest idea of whether or not this act of violence will have any enduring impact. These all fail WP:N and WP:NOTNEWS, and if one were to even attempt to create articles on each of the 100x Palestinians killed compared to Israelis killed you would see how short-sighted that view that "worldwide coverage" means enduring notability is. Seriously, go to the timeline article. Imagine an article for every "Israeli forces killed" ... . nableezy - 17:48, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

2023 Tel Aviv car-ramming was created the day after it happened; none of its victims were Israelis. As I've said, this high-profile triple murder is far more notable than the vast majority of single killings. Obviously the vast majority of them shouldn't have articles. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 18:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Which should likewise be deleted. But whatever, if this is kept Ill create an article for every act of Israeli violence. Idk how much time Id have for my job or life if I do that though, since there are, as youll see at the timeline article, a lot of those. But in what world is this high-profile? I just showed how Israeli soldiers killing a Palestinian teenage boy generated as much coverage as this. Is that high profile too? nableezy - 18:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Anyone is welcome to nominate it for deletion, but it's also notable enough for an article. You know that the vast majority of the many single killings don't have anywhere near the media coverage or notability of this triple murder. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 09:04, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I've explained my reasoning in several of my comments above. We don't know yet whether this event will have enduring coverage or just be one of many atrocities that have happened over the decades. Sometimes it is obvious (e.g. the September 11 attacks) but this is not one of them. This event should certainly be included in the Timeline article but right now I don't think it merits a standalone article. It could in the future if it becomes an iconic or otherwise important event in the course of the Israel-Palestine conflict. Barring that it belongs in the timeline with all the others. Lard Almighty ( talk) 16:11, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete Else if this event is kept as an article, then merge into Draft talk:2023 Hamra junction shooting which was created prior (and will go through vetting pre-publish) and at least has a sensible title. This rush to create articles for every single frequently non notable event is very tiresome, we can't prevent it because someone will put such up within hours of something occurring and frequently before all the facts are in. Selfstudier ( talk) 18:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I agree that they should be merged; I first suggested it. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 09:04, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Covered the world over. Significant coverage in UK and Israeli media. Several Israeli leaders, up to the Prime Minister, have spoken up about this atrocious murder. Has significant coverage. ---Lilach5 ( לילך5) discuss 19:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
• On-the-fence-keep/Wait International, relatively in-depth coverage in a variety of reliable sources. The lasting effect/duration of coverage are hard to determine at the moment. The perpetrators still haven't been caught and no party has explicitly claimed responsibility. The shooting is part of recent tensions that include other attacks with fatalities. In this case, thousands of mourners attended the funeral, top Israeli politicians commented on the shooting (Israeli President, Prime Minister, opposition leader...), and the husband/father of the deceased has started a significant social media campaign (#DeesDay).

While we are working on an encyclopedia and are not here to right great wrongs, there is definitely a systemic bias that must be addressed somehow, considering we have these deletion discussions very often due to the frequency of violence in Israel/Palestine. Media coverage of killings of Israelis by Palestinians tends to receive more attention than killings of Palestinians by Israelis. There are a few potential reasons for this, including the fact that Israelis have better access to international media outlets, while Palestinian media outlets are often less well-resourced and less widely-read. Incidents involving Israeli victims may be seen as more "newsworthy" due to the perception that Israelis are more closely connected to Western countries and values (the victims are often dual citizens, which contributes to the international coverage, such as in this case). Wikipedia's policy of requiring significant international coverage can result in an overemphasis on topics regarding Israelis, to the detriment of those regarding Palestinians. The media's emphasis on Israeli victims perpetuates a narrative of Israeli victimhood and Palestinian aggression, while downplaying or ignoring the experiences of Palestinians who suffer under settlement expansion and unwarranted violence. We must ensure that Wikipedia is a more comprehensive and representative resource for people seeking information about this complex and multifaceted conflict, which is why articles like Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2023 (39 kB of readable prose) require a concerted effort from all invested editors. Mooonswimmer 01:00, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I agree that the 2023 timeline needs more editors. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 09:04, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete as any even less encyclopedic duplication of Draft:2023 Hamra junction shooting. Iskandar323 ( talk) 03:45, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I didn't know of that draft when I created this article. Had it been in mainspace, I probably would've been editing that instead. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 09:04, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I would be happy to see this merged into the draft until it is ready for mainspace. Lard Almighty ( talk) 09:51, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

On the contrary, this article is more encyclopedia (except for its title) Ar2332 ( talk) 20:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete shootings related to the Israel Palestine conflict are too frequent to warrant independent articles dedicated to each of them. I'd seriously advise any keep voters to actually read Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2023, the actual number of shootings even just in this year is staggering. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 10:50, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep Passes WP:GNG. Plenty of significant coverage worldwide from independent, reliable sources: [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27].  //  Timothy ::  talk  03:25, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Do you not even understand what the nominator's rationale was? Using your logic here, every one of the dozens of shootings on the Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2023 would pass the GNG. What makes this shooting any different from the hundreds that go in Israel/Palestine every year? Hemiauchenia ( talk) 03:56, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply

It's different from the large majority in that it's a triple murder of civilians. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 15:54, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep, significant and sustained international media, [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33]. This is not a routine fight with Palestinian militants with some casualties, but rather a terror attack against innocent civilians with the world media covering it. Researcher (Hebrew: חוקרת) ( talk) 10:51, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete, This sort of events happen almost every week in that area and is not notable. Alex-h ( talk) 11:55, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  That's not true. This is the second highest fatality attack this year, after 2023 Neve Yaakov shooting. This attack has received sustained significant media attention, and it doesn't not happen every week. Researcher (Hebrew: חוקרת) ( talk) 12:13, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  We don't know yet if the coverage is sustained. That's the point. It has already disappeared from the headlines in the UK. People die in attacks on a weekly basis in the region. Look at the timeline article. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a news source or a collection of articles that people think are important from their own particular perspectives. It has articles about significant events and people etc. Being tragic does not necessarily make an event significant. A burst of media coverage does not necessarily make an event significant. What makes an event significant is its lasting broader impact. It is too soon to know whether these killings will have a broader lasting impact on the conflict or the region. Lard Almighty ( talk) 12:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep, or rather I'll support the deletion of both the articles including this one and April 2023 Nablus incursion. Pg 6475 ^TM 05:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  Other articles are not the scope here, and this tit-for-tat WP:WAX logic has no place here. Iskandar323 ( talk) 08:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  Agreed. Although I have to point out that this also appears to be the basis of the logic of several of the delete votes (and, indeed, the original nomination). "Why have we got an article on these killings when we haven't got an article about the killing of that Palestinian?" Just as bad. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 09:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  I didn't mean to say that. For the conflict as a whole, many articles are non-notable. Apologies if my statement meant as something else. Pg 6475 ^TM 12:00, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  Agree @ Necrothesp -- Pg 6475 ^TM 12:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  No, the argument is by creating these articles outside of the larger events that have some actual sustained coverage over the course of months and years, that you remove them from their context, in this case an escalation of violence over the last few weeks stemming from several confrontations in Jerusalem. The timeline article, which covers this killing already, is the place to have an actual encyclopedic recounting of the events of the year. Not just skew the overall coverage to Palestinians are violent and kill Israelis. Which is also the effect of having largely the opposite balance in articles on violence to actual victims of violence in the real world conflict. But yes, that incursion article should be deleted too. These are minor events that are not even going to be discussed in any serious way in a few weeks. nableezy - 06:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Casualties in this conflict are disproportionately militants, soldiers & police. Attacks against civilians causing multiple deaths are more likely to be notable enough for articles. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 12:01, 15 April 2023 (UTC) reply

That is not true at all. See here where you will see Palestinian civilian casualties, every single year, dwarfs militant or Israeli military or civilian deaths. So far in 2023, OCHA has 88 Palestinian civilian deaths, 16 militants, and 14 Israeli civilian deaths. Guess how many of the 14 we cover in their own article? All of them. nableezy - 15:03, 15 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I mean in comparison to their populations, not the numbers of each. Militants & soldiers have significantly higher death & injury rates than civilians do. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 17:11, 15 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Again, not true. Palestinian civilian deaths dwarf Palestinian militant deaths. And Israeli deaths of any kind. What you are demonstrating is that only Israeli civilians are deemed worthy of consideration here. Palestinian civilians? Nah, not so much. nableezy - 17:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC) reply

It is true in terms of death/injury rates rather than numbers of them. The number of civilians is multiple times higher than the number of militants & soldiers. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 08:42, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

My guy, the soldier death rate for Israel approaches 0. And that is missing the entire point, that we cover all Israeli civilian deaths extensively and do not cover Palestinian civilian deaths at all. nableezy - 01:49, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep per WP:NOTNEWS, WP:LASTING, WP:EVENT, WP:GNG, and WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Experience from other AFDs is that after the first exposure – ongoing, as impressive as pointed out above, and already making this event notable – violent events of this type keep receiving significant coverage in books that describe the history of an era. There seem to be some issues with the article, for example, the names of three victims are in the title. That's on the high end. That said, delving now into the correct name is pointless as the name could change after the merger with the earlier draft article. Whether the name of the AfDd is really better can be examined in a later rename discussion, if and when. gidonb ( talk) 01:33, 18 April 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.