Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 Jerusalem tractor 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 no consensus. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:16, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2014 Jerusalem tractor attack

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

I am not sure that this article meets the notability guidelines. It appears to be a typical murder - as a rule, murders are not notable. It has similarities to the Jerusalem bulldozer attack 2008 in which thirty people died - but here, only one person died, and the incident never got wide press. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (Message me) 16:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: in the 2008 attack, 3 dead, 30 injured. Note that in some other vehicle attacks with political motives no-one died. Terrorist/political motivation appears to transmit notability.ShulMaven (talk) 21:52, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:10, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This is a tough one. It did receive significant coverage, and has to be viewed as part of the larger Hamas-Israel conflict, having been one of the attacks perpetuated on the Israeli side, as opposed to the Israeli incursion into Gaza. That's how most of the media portrayed it, and given the reduced number of casualties on the Israeli population, this might be significant enough to merit an article. I abstain from voting though, because I'm not knowledgeable enough on the notability of events. CesareAngelotti (talk) 20:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep hardly a "typical" murder, this is terrorism, a piece of construction equipment stolen and deliberately rammed into a public bus in an attempt to commit murder for political motives. It is similar to Omeed Aziz Popal SUV rampage, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar SUV attack, Jerusalem BMW attack, May 2014 Ürümqi attack. My expectation is that this attack will receive future coverage as one of this international series of semi-spontaneous attacks by ramming a vehicle into pedestrians or civilian vehicles by politically-motivated terrorists. ShulMaven (talk) 21:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:44, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per ShulMaven, I do question whether we need articles on every single attack there but it like others it recieved quite alot of coverage . –Davey2010 • (talk) 01:53, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sources indicate notability. Everyking (talk) 02:02, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:EVENT and WP:NOTNEWS as reliable sources appear to have ceased talking about it a day or so after it happened. The fact that some seem to find it a cool and novel method of killing is not a reason to ignore our policies. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:19, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:NOTNEWS. Almost all the sources are within a day or two of the attack. Some are from 2008, but the relevance of those to the event is doubtful. Kingsindian (talk) 03:49, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not every single terrorist attack deserves an article. Only if it was notable for number of causalities, political impact, degree of news coverage, etc - and I don't think this event is notable in any of those ways. SJK (talk) 04:58, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:DIVERSE and general notability guidelines merging to the main article is not possible as it already too large per WP:SIZE--Shrike (talk) 07:23, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Added material on ongoing coverage and political impact. Contrary to assertions above, a rudimentary search turned up ongoing coverage, including an article published 12 minutes ago - some of which I added to the article, and also substantive coverage of the the political and psychological impact of this attack.ShulMaven (talk) 23:55, 6 September 2014 (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.