Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/May 2012 Homs clashes

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 delete. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:37, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May 2012 Homs clashes

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWSPAPER,WP:V,WP:NPOV Gtwfan52 (talk) 16:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I think it would be useful to place the Houla massacre in a bigger context, and this article would seem to be aimed at that objective. __meco (talk) 18:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No need to create a content fork. We have article that deals with all clashes/battles/fights in Homs and Houla massacre is only semi-related event (in the context of military activity in the region) which gained enough publicity to nominate for it´s own article. Frankly, I think that we have too many content forks when it comes to several battles (Idlib, Homs). EllsworthSK (talk) 22:18, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Siege of Homs if User:Alhanuty can add sources to what is claimed in the article. EllsworthSK (talk) 22:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i think the article should stay because there is no article talking about homs after the cease-fire and i think that people should eidt it and add new information toit ,by the way i made the article.

Actually you are wrong Alhanuty. There is an article talking about Homs after the cease-fire. And its Siege of Homs. That article is still open and ongoing. Just read the section titled During the U.N. brokered cease-fire. Also, the cease-fire is still nominally in effect, so there is no after the cease-fire, only during for now. Just put what you have, but sourced, into the Siege of Homs article and that's it. Cheers! EkoGraf (talk) 21:16, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

actually there no information in it talking about what happening in homs after 4-20-2012,it is not tallking about events in homs after 4-20-2012 read it and you will see — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.200.186 (talk) 22:17, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Provide sources for what is written in the article and it shall be used in main article. Fighting in Homs de-escalated since arrival of observers with no reported significant changes on frontline, surge of troops, escalation of artillery shelling or FSA incursions into government-controlled districts. If you claim opposite, provide reliable source which backs it. Otherwise this article should be deleted as it does not meet wikipedia guidelines. EllsworthSK (talk) 01:51, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, there is nothing major to talk about after the 20 of April because nothing major happened during the ceasefire. The fighting there de-escalated. If what you are writing really did happen, but you still haven't provided sources for it, than add it to the main article on the Siege of Homs. If you have a problem with nothing being in that article after April 20 than add something don't just create a new article that is unsourced. Although you were again partially wrong. The Siege of Homs article does talk about after April 20. It talks about the destruction of the Armenian Church and the death of Bassel Shahade. In any case like EllsworthSK says this article talks about a event that is non-notable and un-sourced thus not fullfilling the main Wiki guidelines. EkoGraf (talk) 13:40, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that no sources are given with this page. --Ishiisato (talk) 22:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or per EllsworthSK merge if sources are provided. EkoGraf (talk) 13:52, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What clearer consensus? Two editors here wrote that if original editor of the article will fail to provide sources it should be deleted. He failed to do so, article is un-referenced, delete it. EllsworthSK (talk) 09:43, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or merge There's your clearer consensus. --BDD (talk) 18:32, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Been more than a week since the start of the discussion. Consensus exists. Except for the creator of the article, four editors are of the opinion that the article is in violation of several Wiki guidelines, mainly the basic one, verifiability (no sources) and should be deleted. It was proposed to the creator of the article that if he should find sources to back up the claims than we could merge it to the main article on the siege of Homs. He has not done that thus....delete. EkoGraf (talk) 19:11, 8 June 2012 (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.