Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Palestine

See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel

Points of interest related to Palestine on Wikipedia: Outline – History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Stubs – Assessment – To-do

Deletion Sorting Project
(talk) Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts
v t e

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Palestine. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Palestine|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Palestine. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Middle East.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Palestine/archive

• See also: Wikipedia:Notice board for Palestine-related topics

Jerusalem and its surroundings from the Neolithic period to the Bronze Age (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Entirely WP:OR, poorly written and entirely unsourced essay. Not eligible for CSD and I see no scope for improvement so draftifying isn't appropriate. CoconutOctopus talk 16:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Archaeology, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine. CoconutOctopus talk 16:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you very much for your guidance — you've given me a lot of food for thought. I'm translating an article and will start over, working on it as a draft. Lookelisten (talk) 16:50, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you're looking to move this to a draft and continuing to work on it then I'm quite happy to withdraw the deletion nomination! I was unaware it was a translation! CoconutOctopus talk 16:53, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that the original author of the article had created a draft version they are working on, so I won't be moving this version to draft and instead will still support its deletion. CoconutOctopus talk 22:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I'd say this isn't suitable as a standalone article and is better handled as a section in History of Jerusalem or Archaeology of Israel. Mooonswimmer 18:05, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• delete This really sounds like someone's incomplete term paper, not an encyclopedia article. Mangoe (talk) 02:14, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli plan to occupy and flatten all of Gaza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Name is not official, leaves this article open to POV problems. Information seems to be a fork of Gaza war#Post-war plans. Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 13:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 13:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete: Obvious POV problems — Czello ^(music) 13:34, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Israel, and Palestine. Shellwood (talk) 13:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: POV issues, and for the 4 lines of text, this can be incorporated into an article on the war. Not sure this is notable enough for a stand-alone article. Oaktree b (talk) 14:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete per above. Mooonswimmer 14:09, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: POV problems, far too specific a topic. Any content of merit can be (neutrally) included in Gaza war#Israeli leaders' plans. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: WP:SPECULATION. Israel may or may not have a plan. But until it comes to fruition, it's just one more speculation about an ever changing situation in the middle east. — Maile (talk) 16:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: POV issues. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 16:14, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: WP:CRYSTAL and POV issues. Worgisbor (congregate) 16:35, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: While we can probably make an article covering the government's intentions of expulsion, dispossession and conquest, with appearances of the opinions of (self-described) fascists like Smotrich, having the article title as it currently is would not pass. If we are to create such an article, draft spacing it first so we have something substantially written to put out would be the best course of action, in my opinion. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 19:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Snow Delete, This is a bad fork with some pretty obvious issues with point of view and a near-WP:PEACOCK title. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:01, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete. This is an obvious WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NPOV violation. MidnightMayhem 03:16, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per almost everyone above. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:32, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as a POVFORK of Gaza war. We do have articles discussing every aspect of this war. Maybe the article was made as POINT? Do not redirect as even the name is POV and OR. gidonb (talk) 05:28, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge. The topic is highly notable but WP:SPLIT is unjustified; the content should be integrated into existing relevant articles. Probably a sentence or two can go into the section Gaza genocide#Genocidal intent and/or Palestinian genocide accusation. If Crampcomes has kept the wikisource, then there won't be much practical difference between a delete and a merger - a plain copy/paste won't make sense in any case. If there is no opposition at Talk:Palestinian genocide accusation, then creating a new 5th level ===== sub^4-section there would likely be justified. Boud (talk) 12:36, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or redirect to whatever the main article covering the topic is. MarioGom (talk) 17:58, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per Maile66 as pure Crystal speculation. There is basically one source that this alleged plan was leaked. There is actually a plan by Donald Trump to do this, which is well-sourced and is not a POV fork. The ADL is already on our case. We don't need more fodder for the New York Post gunning to take away the Wikimedia Foundation's charitable status. Bearian (talk) 08:12, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I agree with Cdjp1 that while this article provides some helpful content, it is still not suitable to stand as a separate article. There are too many POV issues. Raymond3023 (talk) 11:39, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NPOV. No evidence that the plan referred to actually exists. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:45, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 al-Funduq shooting (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Also nominating the following related pages:

2024 Ra'anana attack (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

29 October 2024 Beit Lahia airstrike (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

October 2024 Deir al-Balah mosque bombing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

These articles fail WP:GNG. The only coverage is WP:ROUTINE news reporting in the immediate aftermath of the incidents, with no indication of WP:SUSTAINED or WP:LASTING coverage. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS and should not be the paper of record for every isolated act of violence, regardless of scale or tragedy, as part of broader conflagrations.

The presence of significant casualties is not, in itself, a criterion for notability under Wikipedia policy. Notability must be established through multiple, independent, and reliable sources that provide substantial coverage beyond mere event reporting. In these cases, such coverage is absent.

These nominations are being made in the interest of consistency and in light of WP:NPOV. Both Israeli and Palestinian-related events should be evaluated under the same criteria and to avoid selectively retaining articles based on the nationality of the victims.

By contrast, articles like 13 July 2024 al-Mawasi attack (Palestinian) and 2021 Tapuah Junction shooting (Israeli) meet notability due to broad and enduring media analysis and public discourse. These stand in stark contrast to the transient coverage seen in the articles nominated here and mirror the community's consensus to merge 2024 Tarqumiyah shooting (Israeli) and Shadia Abu Ghazala School corpses (Palestinian).

The nominated articles can be and should be merged into Timeline of the Gaza war. Longhornsg (talk) 20:01, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Israel, and Palestine. Shellwood (talk) 22:36, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose deletion of 2025 al-Funduq shooting, 29 October 2024 Beit Lahia airstrike, and October 2024 Deir al-Balah mosque bombing

1. Generally, per WP:LASTING, "It may take weeks or months to determine whether or not an event has a lasting effect. This does not, however, mean recent events with unproven lasting effect are automatically non-notable."
2. The al-Funduq shooting was only 3 months ago, so it is still recent. The death of one of the perpetrators was also mentioned as recently as last week, so that seems to have WP:SUSTAINED coverage.
3. The Beit Lahia airstrike and Deir al-Balah bombing are both mentioned in South Africa's “Public dossier of openly available evidence on the State of Israel’s acts of genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza, as of 4 February 2025” (although the latter is only in a footnote). That these events will be used as evidence in the genocide case makes them lasting. The events are also recent enough that it feels slightly over-zealous to delete.

Not WP:SIGCOV, mentioned in several of over 100 footnotes in a 220+ page legal document. Longhornsg (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Significant coverage was already established through WP:DIVERSE coverage in WP:RS, which is enough per WP:NTEMP.

I think you are misinterpreting WP:ROUTINE. Per WP:NOTROUTINE, "if an article goes into detail about the event, it is not necessarily "routine" coverage." EvansHallBear (talk) 04:16, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

:Support deletion of 2024 Ra'anana attack as event has had not lasting or sustained coverage over the past year. EvansHallBear (talk) 23:49, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me absurd to delete that one and not the others because unlike the others that one actually did get coverage again recently [1]. So I would oppose deleting just that one. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:36, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see that in the article so assumed no subsequent coverage. Should have looked slightly harder. I'm now opposed to all deletions. EvansHallBear (talk) 03:46, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all per EVENT and NOTROUTINE. While it is a bit early for SUSTAINED, similar debates have shown that terroristic events get included in books and revisited in newspapers, reports (as above), and databases. Every such event gets included in the national database with ample information. While we have too much coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on Enwiki, so in this sense I have sympathy for this nomination, these events pass the applicable guidelines. It is my observation that Israelis keep revisiting terror events in newspapers, books and reports. We should really create more coverage of all the rest. gidonb (talk) 14:57, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Starting to look a little like Trainwreckage.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:05, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, per EvansHallBear's comment, which you have not responded to. Easternsahara (talk) 23:46, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep It looks like it is suitable for keeping and relatively has enough sources.110 and 135 (talk) 16:39, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or merge all, per the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shadia Abu Ghazala School massacre - lack of significant ongoing coverage in secondary sources. Can and should be merged as recommended by nominator if not deleted. Smallangryplanet (talk) 10:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget