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.  Sandstein  20:23, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Susya, Har Hebron (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Duplicate of Susya Huldra (talk) 23:14, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Duplicate??? You put back material moved into other article when I split the original into 3 articles Susya, Susya, Har Hebron and Khirbet Susya. It should be 3 different articles like it is in other places such as Carmel, Har Hebron, al-Karmil and Carmel (biblical settlement) or in Hebrew wikipedia for Susya.

Can user Huldra explain why it should be 1 article? Every time you read 'Susya' you have to guess which one of the distinct 3 places it is referred to. Settleman (talk) 07:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. One article covers the same specific locale in its various histories which are intertwined after Jewish settlement. Splitting only created stubs that will remain stubs, since there is a dearth of RS on each element considered independently. The only purpose of the split, as before, was to get rid of the Palestinian historic presence from the new Israel settlement. Wiki is not a tourist airbrushed brochure for readers who displike history and complexity.Nishidani (talk) 16:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying they are at the same location? The UN has here a map which shows they are distinct. Settleman (talk) 22:22, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. (1)Every other settlement has its own article. (2)It sits a few km away from the archaeological site and related to it only by name. (3)Even an outpost of Susya, Mitzpe Yair has it own article, so the main settlement shouldn't??? (4)In talk page of Susya I brought several examples of separate articles in similar cases. Settleman (talk) 08:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:Povfork. These articles have been created in order to deny/hide some part of the reality/situation in contradiction with wp:npov. The material should be gathered in the article Susya. Pluto2012 (talk) 06:36, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you claim it is located at the same site? Just saying it the split is based on my opinion is meaningless because it isn't about the same place! Someone should write about wp:povmerge. Settleman (talk) 22:22, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Settleman + current Susya article is about controversial Khirbet Susya (mainly), then about ancient Jewish town, and a rest only about a subject. --Igorp_lj (talk) 09:46, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I think having separate articles on the ancient site, Palestinian village and Israeli settlement is fine. I am also rather disturbed (although not surprised) by the deletion rationale and some of he subsequent argument for deleting. We have numerous separate articles on Arab villages depopulated during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and the subsequent Israeli localies established in their place. We also have numerous examples of a third article on a historical site in the same location (e.g. Huqoq/Yaquq/Hukok). There seems to be some kind of double standard being played here - i.e. that depopulated Arab villages (which the creator of this AfD has worked on heavily) are worthy of a separate article but Israeli settlements are not). I think the closer of the AfD might also find it useful to read Talk:Susya#Split? and make up their own mind about what is going on here. Number 57 11:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There is not enough here to justify an article covering the same locale in its various histories. Splitting only created stubs that will remain stubs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnmcintyre1959 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnmcintyre1959: Call me paranoid, but an account which was created just a couple of days ago, and whose first edit is to an AfD does not inspire trust in me. The fact that you happen to agree with me here is strange but not relevant. Kingsindian ♝♚ 18:32, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Please see my argument on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khirbet Susya why this cannot be compared with Huqoq / Yaquq And I would definitely argue for a merge between the former Palestinian village of Ayn Karim and the present Ein Karem, ---Huldra (talk) 23:49, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Answer - your logic is sound. The problem is, you neglect the fact Susya, Har Hebron is exactly like your Huquq example b/c it is in a different location and thus your vote should be Keep. Settleman (talk) 16:16, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment User:Number 57: see my comments on Talk:Yaquq: I did not object to a new article Huqoq (in the same place), as there was absolutely no overlapping history: Yaquq and Huqoq could be two clearly defined different articles. This is not the case here. That, and the fact that these new articles were very obviously made by an extremely disruptive sock: when did we start to reward those cheaters? Huldra (talk) 22:12, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is the overlapping history here? There is nothing in the article to connect historical Susya to Khirbet Susya since there is a gap of at least 500 years (13th-19th). The settlement is built a few KMs away and the attempt to include it is based on agenda. Settleman (talk) 13:57, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: There is no overriding reason to split this article, for instance WP:TOOBIG does not apply. Discussing the historical situation is an integral part of any location, especially when the history is not dead, but ongoing. Moreover, we should look at the sources cited. A fair bit of the notability of this article comes from the fact of a struggle about eviction from Susya, with international statements on this by the US and EU. It would be wrong to hive off such matters into a separate article; this would intrinsically violate WP:POVFORK. Also, it is not possible to neatly separate out the Israeli settlement and Palestinian Susya. For instance, the UN factsheet states that People’s access to their farming and grazing land has been progressively reduced due to systematic abuse and intimidation by Israeli settlers. A simple look at the Susya, Har Hebron page shows that nothing of this is mentioned. Kingsindian ♝♚ 11:22, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Answer - The UN report make a clear split between the two. One is Susya and the other is Susiya. By your logic, al-Karmil and Carmel, Har Hebron as well as Adora, Har Hebron and Dura, Hebron should be united. Settleman (talk) 16:27, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they should, but please read WP:OSE. I had no role in creating the other articles, and have no opinion about them. Kingsindian ♝♚ 21:09, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit is a prime example why the articles should be separated. You moved text to create chronological order but now anyone who reads it will think that the settlement was displaced. There is no one timeline because the two are in different location.Settleman (talk) 13:50, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I will deal with the point about "3 separate locations here". Please see this UN map. The original Palestinian community location was declared in 1986 to be an archaeological site and the inhabitants expelled (point 3); they settled a few hundred metres away. The illegal Israeli settlement was built in 1983, and some of the people live in the area from which the Palestinians were expelled (point 5). From the other side, since the 1990s, the Israeli settlement was expanded to "five times the currently built up area" (point 6), which intersects a large part of the Palestinian community area and resulted in "systematic settler violence and intimidation" denying access to 2000 dunums of land (point 7). Whatever your views about settlements, I fail to see how artificially separating out things which are inseparable will lead to a better article. Kingsindian ♝♚ 18:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To your points - The distance between settlement and historical site is almost 2 km. Between Psagot and al-Bireh there is basically a fence and between Ofra and Ein Yabrud there is a road. So what? does that mean they don't need their article? Maybe we should combine Ma'on, Har Hebron and at-Tuwani which are just as close and have just as many issue between settlers and Palestinians. So... many settlements and Palestinian villages has issues and are close by. Lucky for them, their name is different so they got their own article. (Like I mentioned earlier, in your edit you messed up because it is confusing. Which one of the there are we talking about now?) Settleman (talk) 05:54, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Settleman: You are a new user, so here is a tip, free of charge. You are of course free to comment on everything, as you have done on this page, but people are not forced to reply to each and every point you make. You might want to read the essay WP:BLUDGEON. I used to do this as well when I was new, so I don't mind it. Kingsindian ♝♚ 06:46, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - What should I do if another user deletes my comments? Settleman (talk) 13:44, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment that was my mistake; I mixed you up with ISavedPvtRyan, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wlglunight93 ---Huldra (talk) 23:03, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Map of the area showing the 3 different places— Preceding unsigned comment added by Settleman (talk • contribs) 14:15, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all 3 articles; One is about a land rights controversy; one is about a significant archaeological site; and this one is about a small towin where people live. 3 locations = 3 articles. But have a disambigulation line right at the top directing readers to other two places.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:08, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above, establishes notability, W1i2k3i45 (talk) 17:26, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • How can a contributor with 25 edits know the word notability in the context of wp and more precisely wp:AfD ? Pluto2012 (talk) 07:37, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - There is nothing to say about this settlement which is not directly linked with the Palestinian village or the ruins... The only source which is used is the one of the settlement... It is just an attempt of promotion : it has not notorious by itself. Pluto2012 (talk) 07:37, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

a quick look at villages in Template:Hebron Governorate show they some have even less information. Settleman (talk) 07:38, 11 August 2015 (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.