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 No consensus, merged by Pottatoswatter, redirected (we may not delete after a merge for copyright reasons). Fram 14:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pin Khotchathin[edit]

Pin Khotchathin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

A gruesome death but no claim to notability that I can see. killing sparrows 06:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Perhaps this should be merged into South Thailand insurgency. Over 2,000 people have been murdered there by Islamist terrorists in the last few years. Yesterday, for instance, a Buddhist girl was shot as she rode on her scooter through a 'muslim' village, burned alive by her assailants and left to crawl along a road as she died as no-one would come to help her. This is not random murder, it's part of a notable terrorist war. (http://asia.news.yahoo.com/070411/3/305uj.html) Therefore it should be kept, just integrated into the larger article. Nick mallory 08:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nick mallory (talk • contribs) 07:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

• Weak Keep. Nick mallory has a point, but merging may unbalance the main article. As it stands, the article provides relevant contextual information. I have added a reference, which mentions other victims too. ([1]). Stammer 10:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I agree with the previous poster actually, if it was up to me I'd keep the entry in its current form and just link to it from the Thailand Insurgency page. I was just saying that merging it is better than deleting it completely which seemed to be killing sparrows idea. This is a small part of a very notable, and terrible, thing. It's not just a random brutal incident with no meaning. The human faces here should not be forgotten because they're held to be inherently less notable than some cartoon character on TV. 124.183.228.151 13:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment from nominator. I hope no one thinks I am minimizing what is going on over there but should we have an article for each person killed in this insurgency? Each person killed in every insurgency? I agree that other crap exists, but...--killing sparrows 14:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:Should we have a page for each civilian killed in every genocide? In every ethnic cleansing? In every war? Indeed that's not a viable option and pursuing it may be counterproductive. Herewith I change my stance to Neutral. Still, I have learned something through this article. Stammer 15:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge and delete: No notability established, no relevance outside of the general insurgency topic.  RGTraynor  16:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Cynical comment If we merge this back and other "newsworthy-but-nonnotable" deaths back to the main South Thailand insurgency article, that'll set a precedent for other similar articles would get merged back. Then the list of all these deaths will become too big for the article and it'll be split off to a List of people killed in the South Thailand insurgency; then someone will take it to AfD as an indiscriminate list of non-notable people. cab 23:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Incidentally we also have a whole category Category:Victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks, many of whose members have survived AfD debates despite being no more notable than Pin Khotchathin. A long mass deletion vote on them closed as no-consensus; various other have been taken to AfD individually afterwards with mixed results. cab 23:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• keep the victims who are written about individually in newspaper articles or the like become notable, no matter how many. It is not us who make them notable, but the press coverage. Articles are written about things and people that the public in general finds notable. If the newspaper reading public finds every death in a war notable, then so they are. We just record N, not establish it.. DGG 00:31, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. DGG's point appears quite strong to me, so I switch back and reinforce my previous stance. Changing one's mind repeatedly is still better than ignoring valid arguments. Stammer 15:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just merged it (into context) at South Thailand insurgency#Escalating violence. Sad to see how small that is, but there ya go. Two references. Delete. Potatoswatter 18:00, 17 April 2007 (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.