Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 Baghdad police recruitment centre bombing
A strict application of #NEWS might suggest that deletion is the correct outcome, especially since many (not all) of the arguments to keep are rooted in one or more of the "|arguments to avoid in deletion discussions", including ,  (assertion != demonstration), and . The argument to "delete", on the other hand, seems more policy-based: "#NEWS|Wikipedia considers the historical notability of persons and events. ... Routine news coverage ... is not sufficient basis for an article."Many of the arguments to keep offered thus far focus on the very real double-standard at work. The "historical notability" of a terrorist attack that claimed 28 lives on American, Australian, or British soil would undoubtedly not be in question. However, I believe that this bias stems primarily from the fact that deadly suicide bombings are, sadly, not uncommon in Iraq. Moreover, reliable sources (particularly English-language ones) do tend to give disproportionate attention to events in the Anglosphere.For me the key question is whether coverage of this bombing constitutes "routine news coverage". In my opinion, the answer is "no". Reports of results of minor sports games, announcements of local cultural events, and "Today in Iraq"-type daily reports of violence in Iraq ''are'' examples of routine news coverage. However, I do not think that we should consider international coverage of an event—as the main subject of news articles (in the ''BBC'', ''The New York Times'', and elsewhere) rather than as a note in one paragraph—to be routine coverage
— User:Black, 00:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NOT||WP:AADD||WP:BIGNUMBER||WP:ITSNOTABLE||WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS||WP:NOT (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)