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 keep. Per snow. Deletion concerns appear to have been addressed. (non-admin closure) Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 04:48, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shamkhor Massacre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This is just made up massacre and this is not existed. There is no evidence in any other notable sites about this Massacre. NovaSkola (talk) 12:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The article has 11 references, spread throughout its content. How does this correspond to your assertion that it is a "made up massacre"? Meowy 20:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why there is not evidence from websites but from washed up places, even is not notable that things are exists or not.--NovaSkola (talk) 22:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

? I don't understand you. There are no websites mentioned anywhere in the article - all the eleven sources are books. Just because it is an incident that neither you or I have heard of doesn't mean that it is made up. Notability is another matter - that would depend on how important the incident was within the context of the Caucasus at that time. It would be the sources that would decide that, but I'd imagine that 1000 dead Russians would have made for an important incident at the time. Meowy 22:22, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia does not require that sources be available online. The references on this article could be much better formatted, but they are completely valid references. Propose speedy close based on a misunderstanding of Wikipedia policy in the nomination rationaile. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:50, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah, so the complaint was that there were not any online sources, only "washed-up" old media like books! Meowy 22:58, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Exactly. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• STRONG keep: The article contains reliable scholarly references. You haven't checked the references have you ?Nocturnal781 (talk) 00:07, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep The nominator's conduct raises certain questions here. Buckshot06 (talk) 03:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: I see references to it online as well [1] ("The Shamkhor Massacre. When a particularly large and militant group of Russian soldiers began to move along the railroad away from the front in January, 1918, the Military Council of Nationalities decided to disarm them....")[2], the nomination is therefore insufficient grounds for deletion. I knew this would probably be the case before I looked, but nominator User:NovaSkola notes he is pro-Azerbaijani on his page. Its a stereotype to me at this point that all these eastern European and western Asian ethnic groups I barely know anything about are still fighting on Wikipedia about all the bad shit they did to each other at some point, whether it be 100 or 500 or 5000 years ago. Well, guess what, Americans massacred American Indians, had slaves, and did tons of other bad shit too. But that doesn't mean we can say it didn't happen. If there is actual reliable sourcing that puts the existence of this massacre in doubt, then that should be reflected in the article.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 03:53, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Though America has "tons of other (more recent) bad shit" that it won't admit to, has an ongoing production line of "bad shit", and has lots more "bad shit" in the early planning stage. And it too has plenty of pov-warriors on Wikipedia to support it. Meowy 16:03, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's completely correct. They are more insidious than this ridiculous "it didn't happen" baloney like this AfD demonstrates.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 22:21, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep; 53 mentions in book sources, appears to be sufficiently notable. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:48, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep - the article needs improvement but the massacre is a well known event documented in neutral sources. Winterbliss (talk) 23:07, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The user who nominated the article for deletion despite all the bona fide NPOV sources should be warned of disruptive behavior as per WP:NPOV and WP:TE. Winterbliss (talk) 23:13, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep well referenced.--Rafy talk 23:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep well referenced per RightCowLeftCoast. Dehr (talk) 03:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per RightCowLeftCoast. W. B. Wilson (talk) 19:08, 14 March 2012 (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.