Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alcazar Library arson attack: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 36:
*'''Delete'''. Minor news event done in the Breitbart News style, incendiary lede unsupported by the later more factual content. Fails WP:V, WP:NOTNEWS and WP:SOAPBOX. If the library is notable, start over from the [[:fr:Alcazar (Marseille)]] article, rather than this nonsense. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 15:30, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
*:You show you are blinded by leftwing bias by referencing Breitbart. [[Special:Contributions/71.173.76.38|71.173.76.38]] ([[User talk:71.173.76.38|talk]]) 20:04, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
:::What in the world are you talking about? Breitbart is considered an unreliable source and its usage is not permitted on Wikipedia. If you think we are all "blinded by leftist bias" (whatever that even means) then I don't think you'll have a very good time with this site's policy on sources. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 20:32, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
::*I cited the Breitbart style with this article in mind: "Revealed: 1,000-Man Mob Attack Police, Set Germany’s Oldest Church Alight on New Year’s Eve." (Can't link directly as the link as the site is blacklisted, but here's some context: [https://www.dw.com/en/germany-reacts-to-misleading-breitbart-new-years-eve-report/a-37042470]). A sensational and inflammatory lede is followed by content saying that's not what really happened. A stray firework from New Year's Eve celebrations set a small fire that was extinguished in 10 minutes. In the case of Alcazar, "badly damaged by a large fire" is both sensational and grossly hyperbolic. The following statement, "protesters failed to completely destroy the library," is more factual only because the rioters only vandalized the exterior. A citation in the article says they expect to reopen in a few days. Barely rates a one-sentence mention in an article about the protests. Again, Wikipedia is not a soapbox. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 02:01, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - Per nom. and pretty much everyone above, the page as it is is clearly not fit for purppse. The keep !vote and another suggest a move and repurpose, but this is back door deletion, in any case. If we change the article and pretty much all the content, it is a delete by another name. There is a definite case for an article, based on the French article, per Necrothesp, but reading that article shows the little history that has been written here is wrong and needs a healthy dose of TNT. The building was a theatre until 1966. It was not repurposed as a library until 2004. So creating an article is fine, but this article needs deletion. [[User:Sirfurboy|Sirfurboy🏄]] ([[User talk:Sirfurboy|talk]]) 20:36, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
| |||