| Revision as of 14:59, 20 June 2024 editAd Orientem (talk | contribs)Administrators76,351 edits →Vandalism of Stonehenge: Merge← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:00, 20 June 2024 edit undoGenevieveDEon (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users921 edits →Vandalism of StonehengeNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| *'''Delete''' just another stunt from them. No damage - not interesting. ] (]) 12:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' just another stunt from them. No damage - not interesting. ] (]) 12:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Comment from creator''' — I absolutely did '''not''' say the scope couldn’t be expanded. In fact, my regarding notability of the article was to note that LASTING could not be proven, and that a reassessment should occur in a week for notability. I am not going to !vote here, however, {{u|GenevieveDEon}} put words into my mouth in this ] deletion attempt. I personally ignore the nomination reasoning by GenevieveDEon for that reason, however, all other comments (keep, merge, or delete) from other editors I will be looking at extensively and appreciate all the responses. '''The ]''' (] 12:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | *'''Comment from creator''' — I absolutely did '''not''' say the scope couldn’t be expanded. In fact, my regarding notability of the article was to note that LASTING could not be proven, and that a reassessment should occur in a week for notability. I am not going to !vote here, however, {{u|GenevieveDEon}} put words into my mouth in this ] deletion attempt. I personally ignore the nomination reasoning by GenevieveDEon for that reason, however, all other comments (keep, merge, or delete) from other editors I will be looking at extensively and appreciate all the responses. '''The ]''' (] 12:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | ||
| ::On closer inspection, I see that the large additions that were removed were from IP users trying to make the page be about the nearby road tunnel. That's obviously not appropriate in any case. But it does highlight a deeper problem: the concept of 'vandalism' is not culturally or politically neutral, and deciding what should be included or excluded from such a general article would be very difficult. As it stands, this article is still ] on a very short-lived and likely insignificant event. I also note that ] tagged me with the 'climate change is a contentious subject' talk page template. This isn't about climate change. I have no interest in the purported subject matter of the protest. My position would be the same whatever the purpose of the protest - a separate article is unnecessary. And calling this "''the'' vandalism of Stonehenge" was, is, and remains ludicrous. We're not here to elevate utterly trivial news stories into separate encyclopedic topics. ] (]) 15:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Merge with ]''' as per above. For vandalism attempts other than the Just Stop Oil one, they would be more suitable for inclusion in the ] article. --] (]) 12:15, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | *'''Merge with ]''' as per above. For vandalism attempts other than the Just Stop Oil one, they would be more suitable for inclusion in the ] article. --] (]) 12:15, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Expand Scope''' or '''Merge''' — The scope of the article should be expanded to cover '''all''' acts of vandalism to Stonehenge throughout history. If that cannot be agreed apon, then I support a complete merge (the entire article content) into ]. I would also encourage other editors to consider the scope expansion. '''The ]''' (] 12:16, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | *'''Expand Scope''' or '''Merge''' — The scope of the article should be expanded to cover '''all''' acts of vandalism to Stonehenge throughout history. If that cannot be agreed apon, then I support a complete merge (the entire article content) into ]. I would also encourage other editors to consider the scope expansion. '''The ]''' (] 12:16, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' - and expand scope. There must have been similar incident etc in the past. Sourcs are good and notability fow now obvious.] (]) 14:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' - and expand scope. There must have been similar incident etc in the past. Sourcs are good and notability fow now obvious.] (]) 14:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | ||
| ::I regard that as an unncessary content fork - there's not enough on this in the main ] article to warrant it. When there is, then such a fork would be worth considering. ] (]) 15:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Merge''' Incident appears to be a run of the mill publicity stunt with no long term significance specific to this event. Subject fails ], ], ] and the ]. Arguably this is a good example of why we should not ] about recent events. -] (]) 14:59, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | *'''Merge''' Incident appears to be a run of the mill publicity stunt with no long term significance specific to this event. Subject fails ], ], ] and the ]. Arguably this is a good example of why we should not ] about recent events. -] (]) 14:59, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | ||
| ::I strongly agree. ] (]) 15:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:00, 20 June 2024
Vandalism of Stonehenge
New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- How to contribute
- Introduction to deletion process
- Guide to deletion (glossary)
- Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
- Vandalism of Stonehenge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This event is fully covered in a short paragraph in the main Stonehenge article. The idea that something which happened yesterday and was cleaned up today with no lasting effects needs a whole article with the sweeping title 'Vandalism of Stonehenge' is unreasonable. Attempts to query the notability of this article, or to expand its scope to match the title, have been rebuffed by the creator, which rather smacks of WP:OWN. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Merge with Just_Stop_Oil#2024: Per OP. Not independently notable when this is one among many Just Stop Oil protests. — Czello 09:14, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Merge whatever is salvageable to Just Stop Oil per OP. WP:NEVENT is relevant. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:27, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Merge where appropriate and delete. Given the tabby choice of title I'm agnostic if we need even the redirect. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 09:41, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, Environment, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Merge whatever is appropriate to Just Stop Oil. I was tempted to nominate it myself, but thought for some reason we should wait one week or so when coverage inevitably stops. LilianaUwU 10:46, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- With that said, I would be down to expand the scope to all acts of vandalism on Stonehenge. LilianaUwU 13:25, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment the title is simply "Vandalism of Stonehenge" so this article could be used to cover all vandalism attempts on the monument. Otherwise Merge as above— Iadmc♫ 11:29, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete just another stunt from them. No damage - not interesting. Secretlondon (talk) 12:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment from creator — I absolutely did not say the scope couldn’t be expanded. In fact, my only comment regarding notability of the article was to note that LASTING could not be proven, and that a reassessment should occur in a week for notability. I am not going to !vote here, however, GenevieveDEon put words into my mouth in this WP:RAPID deletion attempt. I personally ignore the nomination reasoning by GenevieveDEon for that reason, however, all other comments (keep, merge, or delete) from other editors I will be looking at extensively and appreciate all the responses. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 12:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- On closer inspection, I see that the large additions that were removed were from IP users trying to make the page be about the nearby road tunnel. That's obviously not appropriate in any case. But it does highlight a deeper problem: the concept of 'vandalism' is not culturally or politically neutral, and deciding what should be included or excluded from such a general article would be very difficult. As it stands, this article is still undue emphasis on a very short-lived and likely insignificant event. I also note that User:WeatherWriter tagged me with the 'climate change is a contentious subject' talk page template. This isn't about climate change. I have no interest in the purported subject matter of the protest. My position would be the same whatever the purpose of the protest - a separate article is unnecessary. And calling this "the vandalism of Stonehenge" was, is, and remains ludicrous. We're not here to elevate utterly trivial news stories into separate encyclopedic topics. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Merge with Just Stop Oil#2024 as per above. For vandalism attempts other than the Just Stop Oil one, they would be more suitable for inclusion in the Stonehenge article. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 12:15, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Expand Scope or Merge — The scope of the article should be expanded to cover all acts of vandalism to Stonehenge throughout history. If that cannot be agreed apon, then I support a complete merge (the entire article content) into Just Stop Oil. I would also encourage other editors to consider the scope expansion. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 12:16, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - and expand scope. There must have been similar incident etc in the past. Sourcs are good and notability fow now obvious.BabbaQ (talk) 14:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I regard that as an unncessary content fork - there's not enough on this in the main Stonehenge article to warrant it. When there is, then such a fork would be worth considering. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Merge Incident appears to be a run of the mill publicity stunt with no long term significance specific to this event. Subject fails WP:LASTING, WP:GEOSCOPE, WP:SENSATIONAL and the WP:10YT. Arguably this is a good example of why we should not rush to create articles about recent events. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:59, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I strongly agree. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC)