Holit massacre : It is not notable as a standalone event and should be merged into the parent article.  As previous discussions have noted, this attack has led to far too many unnecessary child articles.  Moreover, this article has very poor-quality sourcing.  None of the included sources even refer to a "Holit massacre" by name, and none provide significant coverage .  They merely assert in passing that some of those killed during the wider massacre were killed in Holit.  All sources are news ( WP:NOTNEWS ) and all are primary, Israeli sources ( WP:PRIMARY , WP:POV .  Dylanvt ( talk ) 14:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 December 22 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 15:11, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime , Events , Israel ,  and Palestine .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:12, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : WP:GNG ( The New York Times , CNN , Detaly , NewsRu , The Guardian , Mako and more).  With regards, Oleg Y. ( talk ) 19:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you, Oleg.  Not a single one of these sources mentions a massacre in Holit.  The only mentions of a massacre or резня are about the broader October 7 attacks.  None of these sources refer to the portion of the attack that took place in Holit as a distinct massacre.  This should thus obviously be merged.  Dylanvt ( talk ) 21:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You don't seem to understand the difference between GNG, delete and rename.  With regards, Oleg Y. ( talk ) 21:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The Guardian article isn't about Holit, its about the journey of the Matias family, including their work in Israel's peace movement, mentioning Holit only in passing.  The CNN source also mentions Holit only in passing and focuses mainly on the experiences of Thai workers, but during Hamas's general attack and for years before that.  I didn't read NYT because its behind a paywall.  The rest of the sources don't look RS.  VR talk 00:08, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oleg Y. ’s sources: New York Times: Several paragraphs about resident of Holit who survived the Holocaust but was killed in the Holit attack CNN: The first third-ish of the article is about a Thai worker from Holit describing how he fought off his attacker and was left for dead.  I wasn’t aware that Thais were involved in this attack, which is definitely an issue to include.  Detaly: (Russian so dependent on Google Translate) Story of three Russian families who survived the Holit attack, gives more detail of how the attack unfolded NewsRu: (Russian) How mother and son survived Holit attack, details of unfolding attack Guardian: Mother uses here body to shield her son during Holit attack.  She and husband killed but son survives injured and spending 7 hours with parents‘ bodies (we seem to have read different articles here) Mako: Long article on attack on Holit, how it unfolded and aftermath All of Oleg Y. ’s articles talk to the Holit attack, most only about the attack.  I’m not sure about the Russian articles but the others are RS.  So notability is achieved here as well - including a diversity of sources.  Ayenaee ( talk ) 01:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Another attack article in the war, I feel like we're building a play-by-play book for future historians.  This one had even less casualties than the last two articles I've commented on; again, I can't see why each and every battle in an ongoing war gets an article.  Yes they're covered in RS, but they're just like every other attack.  I think we should put some sort of edit limit on this topic until the war is concluded, otherwise we're going to see a large amount of these articles come in...Each and every battle isn't notable, that's just the nature of war.  Battles happen; they're all tragic, but this isn't a news repository.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Read WP:NOTPAPER .  There is no upper limit to the number of articles that can be created.  As long as the topic meets our notability guidelines, it should be kept.  Marokwitz ( talk ) 14:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] A) This wasn't a "battle".  B) Massacres with less victims are dealt with as - massacres.  C) I'm not aware of any "Massacres perpetratwd by Hamas in 2023" article, so there isn't any "parent article".  If there were one, I'd be happy to discuss this.  Conclusion: disingenuous?  Strongly oppose.  Arminden ( talk ) 12:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep and a moratorium on further such nominations which lack any merit, Andre 🚐 20:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Any reasoning to back that up?  Dylanvt ( talk ) 21:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Of course.  Per Oleg and others.  meets GNG easily.  Andre 🚐 21:18, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I support the moratorium.  As nomination of multiple article including the ones closed a month ago and trying to argue absence of notability is absurd here.  With regards, Oleg Y. ( talk ) 21:24, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - plenty of reliable sources.  Massacre received international attention.  WP:GNG.  BabbaQ ( talk ) 20:39, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] How are there plenty of reliable sources?  Where are the reliable sources?  Not a single source on the article mentions or even so much as implies a "Holit massacre".  None of the sources there are even about the portion of the October 7 attack that was on Holit.  Per WP:SIGCOV this is absolutely not notable.  Please limit your argumentation to actual Wikipedia policies, not to the vibes you get about the matter.  Dylanvt ( talk ) 21:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep .  As in the other proposals by the same nominator, there seems there to be a misunderstanding of our Wikipedia:Deletion policy .  At most this is a rename proposal.  There was significant coverage of this event in reliable sources as shown by Oley Y. Marokwitz ( talk ) 14:12, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There have been doubts raised about whether those sources are about this particular event.  VR talk 00:08, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I’ve responded to those doubts showing that the impugned sources are about this event Ayenaee ( talk ) 00:39, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep A significant and covered event.  Eladkarmel ( talk ) 13:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I agree with the nominator that this article is not is not sufficiently wikified, nor does it have sufficient resourcing.  I assume it was written by someone unaware of wikipedia policy.  But I don’t agree that the subject isn’t worthy of it’s own articles; The determinant of notability is wide coverage in reliable resources.  The sources in the current article don’t show this.  But the superficial analysis I did of google search results for "Kibbutz Holit" do show such resources (see below).  The example of Ein Hashlosha (and others) is not sufficient to delete all articles of this kind.  The Keep/delete/merge on these kinds of articles are dependent on a case by case analysis.  There are many well written and resourced "child" articles of this nature, which exist on this event from various points of view.  They give further information which can’t necessarily be summarized in a large parent article Reference to NOTNEWS (made up of Not OR, Not written as news reports / Not Who’s who / Not gossip) isn’t relevant.  None of its definitions are relevant to the intentions of this article, which itemds to gives additional notable information related to the war in wiki voice with appropriate RS.  We should t throw away a notable article just because it isn’t written the best way, we should improve it.  The references to PRIMARY and POV seem to suggest that references written in the country of a combatant are automatically PRIMARY (which is not the case, primary/secondary remains irrespective of geography) or POV.  I understand that that sources in a particular combatants region could be potentially biased, but this isn’t a given and if the source is RS it’s bias should be determined by consensus on an item-by-item, article-by-article basis.  If bias exists it also doesn’t mean discarding a resource, it’s substance should be reported in neutral wiki voice and balanced by other resources as appropriate.  In any event there are other resources which can be used from other sources as mentioned below My superficial google search found the following references which include Holit as 50+ % of the coverage.  I stopped once I determined that there was enough diverse coverage to make this article notable and NPOV.  I’m not guaranteeing that all are reliable, but given how small a sample this is, they indicate the existence of sufficient sources for notability and npov: At least 29 killed incl.  8 babies: Politifact 3 tanks involved in suppressing: Haaretz Winn news (and others).  Walkthrough of kibbutz after event: Winn News Roya news.  Hamas video of kidnapped children from Holit being coddled, treated well and fed after being taught to say grace before eating: Roya News Al Jazeera.  Cleaning up Holit.  Al Jazeera As I have with a couple of articles, if the  decision is keep I will investigate resources in depth and use them to wikify the articles.  I haven’t reviewed Oleg Y. ’s references but I assume they are also useful for enlarging the article.  Happy editing.  Ayenaee ( talk ) 20:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] These sources don't appear to be about the Holit massacre.  The politifact source doesn't give SIGCOV to the Holit massacre, and instead focuses on Col. Golan Vach's statements.  The Haaretz article is not about the Holit massacre but about All-woman Israeli tank crew fight (2023) (which is also currently at AfD).  The Al-Jazeera article is indeed about Holit (although it doesn't call it massacre), but mainly mentions that 13 people were killed, there's not much SIGCOV there.  VR talk 00:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The Politifact source is correcting an incorrect allegation made about the Holit attack.  It provides detail of what actually happened in the attack: "In an emailed statement to PolitiFact, an Israel Defense Forces spokesperson said Vach was explaining the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Holit kibbutz in southwestern Israel. A longer version of the same footage makes it clear that Vach is referring to the scene the Israeli military encountered."  The article on the Israeli all woman tank crew discusses how they participated in the defense of Holit: "The IDF has come under intense criticism for its initial slow response to Hamas' attack on October 7, but one unit that jumped into action almost immediately was a group of women tank operators from the Paran Brigade that helped turn the tide and clear dozens of terrorists from the kibbutz of Holit ."  A wiki article in the woman tank crews is up for AfD, but is irrelevant to this AfD where the article is being used to provide information on the Holit attack, not the fact that they’re woman tank crews.  We can disagree on what’s considered sufficient SIGCOV when these are used in the article.  One complaint was that there were to many Israeli sources, this is one of two non Israeli sources (after a superficial search as I’ve noted).  We are not debating here what the name of the article should be.  Ayenaee ( talk ) 00:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I have to support Ayenaee's interpretation that this is clearly all about this event and constitutes sufficient coverage for such a thing.  Note that although it feels like a long time ago, Oct 7 was still quite recent.  These events will only continue to grow in prominence over time, I can't see that it doesn't already meet GNG.  Andre 🚐 00:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Per Oleg Y. and Ayenaee .  A significant event with media coverage.  Dovidroth ( talk ) 07:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - but only because no RS with SIGCOV have been presented.  If someone can find multiple such sources, ping me, and I'll change my ! vote.  VR talk 00:18, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Oleg Yunakov sources listed above and Ayenaee analysis above show this meets GNG, there are sufficient WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth to support a stand alone article.  Article needs to be improved/expanded, but it meets WP:N.  // Timothy :: talk 07:11, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per @ Oleg Yunakov Abo Yemen ✉ 12:58, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above, Pretty sure we already had an AFD on this article recently so not sure why this was raised again.  Homerethegreat ( talk ) 17:39, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] "Merging" is better Keep .  No notability problem.  Legitimate SPINOFF of the attack on Israel at large.  gidonb ( talk ) 19:39, 26 December 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep