Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Duki coal mine attack

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 redirect‎ to Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2024. Content can be merged from history. As Liz notes, the "keep" arguments are weak, merely asserting notability but not explaining why. Sandstein 21:25, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Duki coal mine attack

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NEVENT. Should be merged into Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2024 like other similar incidents. Wikibear47 (talk) 07:28, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2024: Into existing article. 181.197.42.215 (talk) 09:44, 14 October 2024 (UTC) Striking sock !vote. Daniel (talk) 22:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Terrorism, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 10:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I would say do not RUSHDELETE. Since this happened just a few days ago and we still need to determine if it meets or fails the NEVENT, I would suggest Draftify it for now. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:16, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak merge. Not a lot here that can’t be contained in the list article easily. If it does prove notable through depth and length of coverage - which, there are some indications this might, it can always be re-split out. I oppose draftifying because there’s no problems solved there not solved by a merger. Pakistan specifically only very rarely has long term coverage of events that would receive retrospective coverage in many other countries. But this one seems quite severe so it could change. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

merge to the Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2024 article since that suggestion was sockstriked PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:16, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Change vote to redirect. Even if there's nothing to merge I find maintaining the link as a redirect makes it clearer to future readers that there was once a page there. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as already in Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2024.--Gul Butt (talk) 20:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the terrorist attack is notable enough with significant no. of deaths and easily passes WP:GNG. Mister Banker (talk) 09:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as 21 deaths is a not insignificant number, and its too soon to declare WP:NOTNEWS or WP:NEVENT Jebiguess (talk) 06:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Gul Butt, a merge is unnecessary in this case. This is a WP:News article and lacks sustained, significant, secondary coverage. Notability is not inherited by casualty count. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2024. I think WP:NOTNEWS comes into play here. Although the event was significant, it remains a news story, and it's hard to tell what impact it will have later on (WP:CRYSTALBALL). By merging it, users will be able to find the event if needed, but I don't think a standalone article is merited at this time. DesiMoore (talk) 15:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the attack passes WP:NCRIME in which foreign nationals were killed and received a WP:DIVERSE coverage. --Ameen Akbar (talk) 20:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Significant damage happened here and the sourcing is also not weak. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 19:22, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Arguments are divided between Keep and Merge but Keeps are weak, just asserting the subject is notable without highlighting what sources help establish GNG. Claims have to be backed up by evidence.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:05, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: there were only 2 merge !votes prior to your relisting. It's seems like you are just going to re-list until the time the result seems favorable to your POV. Mister Banker (talk) 00:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mister Banker, I don't care what happens with this particular article, I was just assessing the discussion as I saw it at the time. But since you have raised objections, I will let other editors/admins handle this discussion in the future. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: to the list of "Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2024"; this can always be broken out again into a new article if it turns out this is a substantially notable event. It doesn't seem to be at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 14:57, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the terrorist attacks list, where it is already discussed. Merging would not be appropriate since there's already the standard amount of info present in the list entry. JoelleJay (talk) 23:11, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Selectively merge and redirect to Insurgency in Balochistan#Fifth conflict, 2004–present. This was widely reported internationally, which does give an indication of notability per WP:GEOSCOPE, however it's difficult to gauge the lasting effect of this incident. Thousands of miners reportedly left the area [1] but is this long term? Other editors have proposed Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2024 for redirect/merge, however that article gives a sentence or two summary of the basic facts of each incident, so merging all the content there would give undue weight to this attack. Also, that page is itself a news-type summary with zero analysis and of questionable encyclopaedic value. Sources state no group has claimed responsibility for the attack and the Balochistan Liberation Army has denied involvement and condemned it. If/when the authorities charge/convict the perpetrators, a merge to the relevant terrorist group's article may be appropriate, but until that is determined a more relevant/precise target to give reader's some background and understanding of the conflict is for a redirect and selective merge to Insurgency in Balochistan . . .. Rupples (talk) 01:25, 4 November 2024 (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.