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 delete. We are, as is correctly pointed out, not the news. Retitling the article removes some of the concerns but not all--and honestly, one wonders who could call an article "Murder of..." when no murder is proven yet and the investigation is ongoing. At any rate, that the GNG appears to be met is not that relevant (it was a noteworthy death, noteworthy for the news); what is relevant is that such a death needs to have lasting consequents of some kind or another, and this is not yet proven, obviously. Drmies (talk) 00:37, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Netanel Arami[edit]

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

By reading the sources it is clear that it is not sure that this is even was a murder; it could have been an accident. But this is already listed in category "Terrorist incidents in Israel in 2014"! This is plainly absurd. Huldra (talk) 21:22, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you object to a link, take it to talk. A link is not an article. Nor is it a reason to start an AFD.ShulMaven (talk) 22:26, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article is about a death while rappelling. The family and friends suspected foul play and raised a very public fuss. Forcing the police to investigate. Investigation revealed that the rope had been cut. Victim in Jewish, co-workers are Arabs. All of this played out in headlines. Politicians are using it (today) to claim that police are not sufficiently aggressive in in investigating possible Lone wolf (terrorism) in this and other cases, and for all the usual reasons that politicians use.... As the article says the investigation is ongoing. So are the headlines.ShulMaven (talk) 22:26, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and while the "investigations are ongoing", you have already placed this in the category "Terrorist incidents in Israel in 2014". This is absurd. Huldra (talk) 23:49, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 00:07, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This topic has been covered a great deal in the news and is definitely worthy of an article. Disagreeing with a category seems more like a topic to be brought to talk rather than to delete — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galatz (talk • contribs) 00:12, 3 November 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:26, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per WP:GNG which is covered. --BabbaQ (talk) 07:51, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete of course. About half a million people are murdered every year, why does this "maybe" deserve a page? The answer is given by the article creator above: "Victim in [sic] Jewish, co-workers are Arabs". Enough of this. Zero^talk 09:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: because police handling of this murder became a political issue and coverage of that issue in reliable sources has been extensive.ShulMaven (talk) 12:32, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You created a page whose very name grossly violates WP:BLP (no murder has been proved against those suspected), against the memorialising guideline. You even added his children's names and his wife's pregnancy in order to evoke sympathy, and added it to a terrorism category without sufficient cause to make sure we got your point. Your "political issue" argument is nonsense: politicians making statements about a case don't make it a political case. Zero^talk 23:31, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

According to Haaretz, "police investigators noticed that the cable he was tied to had been deliberately cut and decided to open a murder investigation. The only other people in the vicinity at the time of Arami's death were Palestinian workers from the territories, so Shin Bet security officials also got involved. A gag order was placed on the investigation's details."[1] Shin Bet related murder investigations involve tighter gag orders than other types of murder, see, for example, Murder of Shelly Dadon, a case regularly compared to this one in the Israeli press.ShulMaven (talk) 01:53, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:EVENT/WP:NOTNEWS. It happened a month and a half ago and coverage appears to have ceased; it doesn't have the persistence necessary to satisfy the notability guidelines. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:08, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Except WP:NOTTEMPORARY public outcry does not need to have "persistence" to be WP:N. ShulMaven (talk) 19:26, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There also is a gag order on the investigation so there is nothing the news can report on right now. - Galatz (talk) 14:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - as min, till the investigation's finish. --Igorp_lj (talk) 16:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with User:Zero0000. Not sure how this is notable. Thousands of people die every year. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 00:57, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As of now, its plainly notable, because its a subject of active political debate. Maybe revisit this down the road and see if anyone remembers this; I suspect it will turn out to not be notable in the long run, but six weeks is not enough. Djcheburashka (talk) 01:07, 10 November 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, j⚛e decker ^talk 01:43, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relist note: I would strongly recommend that opinions going forward engage with the specifics of WP:EVENT. Thank you. --j⚛e decker ^talk 01:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For ease of reference, here's what I think is the key quote from WP:EVENT: It may take weeks or months to determine whether or not an event has a lasting effect. This does not, however, mean recent events with unproven lasting effect are automatically non-notable. Djcheburashka (talk) 04:24, 10 November 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.