Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel

WP:DISRAEL

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Israel. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Israel|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Israel. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Middle East.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Palestine, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism, Wikipedia:Notice board for Israel-related topics

Israel

Canopy (app)

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

The app`s article lacks sufficient coverage from independent, reliable sources to establish the app's notabili Hopkinkse (talk) 15:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Hopkinkse (talk) 15:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My doubts about the nominator aside, this is not a notable product, at least not according those sources, which basically has one decent article about the product/company, and three instances of the product being mentioned. This should have been worked on in draft space. Delete. Drmies (talk) 15:52, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Internet, and Israel. – The Grid (talk) 16:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KeepI was in the middle of writing this article. I was doing research which I was planning to add. Then, without warning, somebody (who has only a few edits to their credit and obviously no understanding of how much work is involved) added a deletion notice. I have now added many more sections to the article, as I was intending, in any case, and every statement is backed up. I will continue to improve it, because I think the subject is an important one in this day and age. This particular app is certainly not the only one, and maybe not a perfect solution, but I don't see anyone adding deletion tags to every parental control app on Wikipedia.Simxaraba (talk) 16:47, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Simxaraba, you run that risk when you put things up in main space rather than write them up as a draft. If I had run into it I would have moved it to draft space, but the lesson here should be simple: don't put something up live if it's not ready. As for the "every other parental app", that's just not an argument at all. Subjects are regarded on their own merit and there is no conspiracy. Here is a long list of arguments to avoid. Drmies (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Yeah I had the article open and was planning to draftify, but now that it's here it has to be assessed against WP:NORG / WP:PRODUCT. On the other hand, even if the article is "deleted" it can be refunded to draftspace or email to use elsewhere, so the work won't be lost even if that comes to pass. Alpha3031 (t • c) 03:39, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:49, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I agree with Drmies. Maybe there is an hypothetical version of this article that would warrant keeping it, but currently it reads more like a promo for the app. Turquoise (talk) 18:47, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miscalculation (Israel)

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

Non-notable phrase, see WP:NEO. Aydo h8^{[what have I done now?]} 11:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Israel. Aydo h8^{[what have I done now?]} 11:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not enough characteristic usage to justify an article. Zero^talk 11:32, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To answer DGW below, I agree it is not neologism. It is a common word that some people have applied to some situations. That doesn't establish independent notability. Lots of people throughout history called lots of things "miscalculations"; why is it special this time? Zero^talk 13:46, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is special, because this single word determined if the Gaza war occurred or not. See Helen of Troy. _Dgw|Talk 14:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Miscalculation is the key word of the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel. It happened twice, in 1973 and in 2023. It took a year and a half until the truth was revealed. I do not claim that Netanyahu was "right" or Bar was "right", but something very wrong happened in Israel due to this miscalculation. Furthermore, it is not a "neologism" but a word which exactly reflected the situation between Israel and Hamas. Israel wanted Hamas would be satisfied, and Netanyahu wrote it in his affidavit, but Hamas wanted to conquer Israel. Heads of Hamas said clearly that they would not make the attack if they knew the reaction of Israel and of the world (mainly of Trump). The history will judge. _Dgw|Talk 12:35, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article isn't really about a term, it's more about the application of a common word to a specific situation. But it's clear there's no way to write this article without original research. hinnk (talk) 08:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is not original research. It is clearly cited: 1. New York Times, 2. Times of Israel, 3. JPost, 4. Middle east eye, 5. Politico, 6. Los Angeles Times, 7. Times of Israel. _Dgw|Talk 14:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

American-Israeli airstrike on Iran

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

Speculative article (violating WP:CRYSTAL) based primarily on synthesis of political rhetoric. There is no ongoing or formally planned operation, nor is there even a hypothetical event widely covered with detailed analysis. Mooonswimmer 18:39, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Iran, Israel, and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:51, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete As stated by the nomination, wikipedia is not a WP:CRYSTALBALL. There doesn't seem to be any formal plan. Sourcing largely seems to be a notably unreliable queens man making threats.
Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 19:07, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Article with no substance about a hypothetical attack. We can't have an article on every possible military encounter that might happen where there's nothing else accompanying the mere possibility. — Czello ^(music) 19:03, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. 🦅White-tailed eagle^{Talk to the eagle}Stalking eagle 19:16, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Preparations are underway by the US[1][2] as well as Iran[3][4] for the possibility of war. There's hypothetical speculation as well[5]. Moreover, we have similar articles e.g. Operation True Promise III. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crampcomes (talk • contribs) 15:48, April 27, 2025 (UTC)

Delete: WP:CRYSTAL Wikipedia does not divine the future. — Maile (talk) 21:40, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per WP:CRYSTAL. Fear-mongering isn't article-worthy. Jebiguess (talk) 21:53, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There's always plans for war against someone ready to go, but they aren't currently in the offing. This is CRYSTAL fanfiction otherwise, mainly from fringe sources, defense contractors with skin in the game and blogs which want this to happen for content reasons (and for fun I guess, WP:DAILYMAIL). Nathannah • 📮 23:33, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. purely speculative and per WP:TRUMPCRUFT. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 00:56, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Article for an attack that hasnt even happened, pure fear-mongering. Its too early to make an article about this.

See WP:CRYSTAL or per nomination Thegoofhere (talk) 05:33, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom.Iranian112 (talk) 09:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete pure speculation. Azuredivay (talk) 16:53, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This seems to be an article founded on speculation regarding things that have not yet occurred. Therefore, I think this is a classic example of WP:CRYSTAL and unworthy of its own article. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 15:09, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aki Avni

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

Fails WP:ACTOR - non-notable actor - has only played small roles in a few films, best sources I could find was this TMDB, Amazon, IMDb, Apple TV, etc. GoldRomean (talk) 17:01, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, Theatre, Israel, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:48, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sourcing could be better, but Avni meets WP:CREATIVE and is one of Israel's best-known actors [6]. In-depth profile in Haaretz here, full-length review of his directorial debut in Ynet here, profile in the Jerusalem Post here, multiple-time winner of the Ophir Prize (the "Israeli Oscars"), etc. Longhornsg (talk) 19:18, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To improve the quality of my contributions to AfD, may I know how those sources were found? Thank you! GoldRomean (talk) 02:15, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping, I guess: @Longhornsg (sorry if this does not belong on the nom page). GoldRomean (talk) 02:15, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Famous, award winning actor, with many important roles. Easy pass of WP:ACTOR #1. The deletion rationale is seriously mistaken. An extensive Hewiki article, reflecting the actor's fame (!), with many references is only one click away. This nomination is an obvious BEFORE failure. Who will be nominated next? Topol? gidonb (talk) 23:22, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just recalled: someone recently nominated Hakol Over Habibi as well! gidonb (talk) 13:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 al-Funduq shooting

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

Also nominating the following related pages:

These articles fail WP:GNG. The only coverage is WP:ROUTINE news reporting in the immediate aftermath of the incidents, with no indication of WP:SUSTAINED or WP:LASTING coverage. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS and should not be the paper of record for every isolated act of violence, regardless of scale or tragedy, as part of broader conflagrations.

The presence of significant casualties is not, in itself, a criterion for notability under Wikipedia policy. Notability must be established through multiple, independent, and reliable sources that provide substantial coverage beyond mere event reporting. In these cases, such coverage is absent.

These nominations are being made in the interest of consistency and in light of WP:NPOV. Both Israeli and Palestinian-related events should be evaluated under the same criteria and to avoid selectively retaining articles based on the nationality of the victims.

By contrast, articles like 13 July 2024 al-Mawasi attack (Palestinian) and 2021 Tapuah Junction shooting (Israeli) meet notability due to broad and enduring media analysis and public discourse. These stand in stark contrast to the transient coverage seen in the articles nominated here and mirror the community's consensus to merge 2024 Tarqumiyah shooting (Israeli) and Shadia Abu Ghazala School corpses (Palestinian).

The nominated articles can be and should be merged into Timeline of the Gaza war. Longhornsg (talk) 20:01, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Israel, and Palestine. Shellwood (talk) 22:36, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion of 2025 al-Funduq shooting, 29 October 2024 Beit Lahia airstrike, and October 2024 Deir al-Balah mosque bombing

Generally, per WP:LASTING, "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."
The al-Funduq shooting was only 3 months ago, so it is still recent. The death of one of the perpetrators was also mentioned as recently as last week, so that seems to have WP:SUSTAINED coverage.
The Beit Lahia airstrike and Deir al-Balah bombing are both mentioned in South Africa's “Public dossier of openly available evidence on the State of Israel’s acts of genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza, as of 4 February 2025” (although the latter is only in a footnote). That these events will be used as evidence in the genocide case makes them lasting. The events are also recent enough that it feels slightly over-zealous to delete.

Not WP:SIGCOV, mentioned in several of over 100 footnotes in a 220+ page legal document. Longhornsg (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Significant coverage was already established through WP:DIVERSE coverage in WP:RS, which is enough per WP:NTEMP.

I think you are misinterpreting WP:ROUTINE. Per WP:NOTROUTINE, "if an article goes into detail about the event, it is not necessarily "routine" coverage." EvansHallBear (talk) 04:16, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~:Support deletion of 2024 Ra'anana attack as event has had not lasting or sustained coverage over the past year.~~ EvansHallBear (talk) 23:49, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me absurd to delete that one and not the others because unlike the others that one actually did get coverage again recently [7]. So I would oppose deleting just that one. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:36, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see that in the article so assumed no subsequent coverage. Should have looked slightly harder. I'm now opposed to all deletions. EvansHallBear (talk) 03:46, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per EVENT and NOTROUTINE. While it is a bit early for SUSTAINED, similar debates have shown that terroristic events get included in books and revisited in newspapers, reports (as above), and databases. Every such event gets included in the national database with ample information. gidonb (talk) 14:57, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dov Shafrir

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

My WP:BEFORE results in insufficient sources and especially WP:RELIABLESOURCES for this to pass WP:GNG. The mention at best should be cited in another article about Palestinian re-settlement, but this person does not meet GNG for an article unto themself. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:09, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Loads of sources, in the scholarshp and news: passes WP:ANYBIO. Senior character in the newly-independent Isreal government: passes WP:NPOL. Cheers, Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 17:18, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. Easternsahara (talk) 23:36, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Perhaps there's an appropriate redirect or merge target. All the sources added today are not coverage about Shafrir, and there were no sources presented that demonstrate WP:SIGCOV of Shafrir himself to satisfy WP:NBIO. From looking through the sources, these are simply singular, mostly single-line mentions of Shafrir's appointment in 200+ page books. We've deleted based on far more coverage. Obvious WP:GNG fail. Longhornsg (talk) 18:56, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and Palestine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have added two links that provide basic biographical details; per WP:BASIC multiple sources can be combined in lieu of significant coverage. His involvement in the redistribution of Palestinian property is of historical interest and his work is well documented (e.g, in this encyclopedia entry which quotes his report at length. The fact that other deletions proceeded under supposedly analogous circumstances is a non sequitur. Oblivy (talk) 02:35, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"...trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability" So then it must just then be proven that these are not routine coverage or passing mentions in order for WP:BASIC to qualify. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:53, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sources are discussing him in the context of his project, and coverage of that project was more than trivial. You don't get to stop with "He was appointed to head the X project" if the rest of the paragraph is about X project.
If there was consensus for merge Iand redirect to Israeli land and property laws#Absentees' Property Laws I'd be prepared to support it. I still think this can live happily as a well-documented stub. Oblivy (talk) 13:26, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would support that over a Keep. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:41, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails Wikipedia:Notability_(people). There seems to be no SIGCOV of him. He seems solely known for being the first Israeli Custodian, a role which isn't itself notable enough for an article. Some of his work definitely seems notable for mentions in an article, but presumably they're already included here: Israeli land and property laws -- Bob drobbs (talk) 15:53, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to presume; you can look at the linked article and see how it's handled. That's why I suggested a merge and redirect. Oblivy (talk) 22:30, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:52, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Israeli land and property laws#Absentees' Property Laws. Per nom, there isn't enough WP:SIGCOV in WP:RELIABLESOURCES to justify a standalone article on the subject.--DesiMoore (talk) 23:26, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If consensus supports that, then I would support the merge to Israeli land and property laws#Absentees' Property Laws as you suggest. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:35, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect (nominator here), updating my !vote to reflect the positive and most recent suggestions that instead of a full delete that the subject article title be redirect instead to Israeli_land_and_property_laws#Absentees'_Property_Laws. This is a good suggestion and the best AtD. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:58, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as the editor who suggested merge and redirect as an ATD:

First, biographical coverage of the article subject appears limited, but his work is covered in great detail in a few sources, for example here at 69 et seq. Every time the word "custodian" is mentioned in relation to that period it means this one person.
Second, the more important topic is the initial redistribution of seized property, which is addressed at the target article but in an extremely clinical manner despite the lengthy quotes. The focus of that article is not history, but a series of statutes and institutions. I'm not sure how the merge would sit within that article but perhaps a short paragraph about the initial seizure and redistribution would be appropriate.

I still think this article is fine as a stub. It could be appropriately rescoped into an article about the custodian's office -- I'm not knowledgeable enough or in a position to devote time to doing it, but IMHO that would be the best thing for the encyclopedia. Oblivy (talk) 00:55, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone search Hebrew-language sources? WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:35, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scholar has two links which are paywalled, one of which is on transfer of lands. He has an autobiography that's available in some Worldcat libraries. I'm pretty limited here. Oblivy (talk) 05:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:13, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review

Proposed deletions

Templates

Images

Redirects

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Requested Moves

Miscellaneous

Israel

Canopy (app)

Miscalculation (Israel)

American-Israeli airstrike on Iran

Aki Avni

2025 al-Funduq shooting

Dov Shafrir

Deletion review

Proposed deletions

Templates

Categories

Images

Redirects

Requested Moves

Miscellaneous