Deletion of Beersheva bus station shooting

Comment: Substantial coverage in reliable sources. AfD proponent's prediction that this will have no long term effect is a just that -- a |prediction. Perhaps proponent can revisit at a later date when their prophecy pans out. However typically these type of large scale attacks have international and national ramifications especially under the specific circumstances in which an innocent person was lynched mistakenly
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: largely per {{u|Roscelese}}. It looks like the vast majority of coverage comes from a span of just a few days. Recent events aren't automatically non-notable, but that doesn't mean any article about an event gets a free pass for some arbitrary period of time (). It's a gray area, to be sure. It's where we have to come to a consensus about sustained coverage. Do the events and coverage so far lead us to believe there will be lasting significance / sustained coverage? I have to lean delete. That said, I notice the word "merge" does not appear anywhere in this long discussion. I'd certainly be open to a possible merge target as well as moving to draftspace to preserve the work and hopefully move it back to the article space pending more coverage. &mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: I personally find it interesting that it was in Beersheva" and "Wikipedia must cover every event in Israel" are not valid AFD rationales. This got the usual 24 hours of |routine |news coverage and then one or two other articles within the same week, but at less than a month later, it doesn't look like |lasting impact or coverage will be demonstrated. If we're wrong, we can recreate it, but it would be foolish to keep all of these spam articles |just in case anyone covers the incidents in the future
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ROUTINE||WP:NOTNEWS||WP:EVENT||WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: This is another  article, part of a collection that seeks to portray Israelis as the victims and Palestinians as the attackers, and there is already an article that can cover these recent attacks: Israeli–Palestinian conflict (2015). Nishidani's comments on the downplaying of a very significant part of the shooting (the Eritrean that got beaten and killed) shows even more clearly the focus to show one side as victims
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:MEMORIAL)