Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wilayat al-Raqqa (ISIL)

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 per failure to meet notability criteria. As well, there is current consensus to delete this type of article across multiple discussions. (The redirect will be deleted also.) — CactusWriter ^(talk) 21:17, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wilayat al-Raqqa (ISIL)[edit]

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

ISIL is a terrorist organization that controls territory, not a state. As such, its territorial claims are not automatically assumed to be notable. There are many reliable sources covering ISIL’s rule over the Raqqa region, but most of them did not describe Raqqa as a Wilayat. I did find a possible source that mentions this Wilayat by name ([1]), buts the name of the supposed Wilayat is in quotation marks and is used once in the entire article. As there are few reliable sources treating occupied Raqqa as a legitimate sub-state entity, I believe the article on the Wilayat should be deleted for failure to meet notability requirements. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:03, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete as per the nominator and rational for other similar articles for ISIL Wilayats already deleted (5 so far) or facing deletion (many) under various criteria. Legacypac (talk) 07:45, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Simply for lacking notability. For more explanations, one may refer to the former discussions on the similar articles of the same type most of which are deleted and many others are waiting for deletion. Mhhossein (talk) 13:22, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:25, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:26, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the article is informative and sourced enough to stand on its own merit.GreyShark (dibra) 21:43, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Greyshark09: Hey, Please see the pile of similar deleted articles. The response to your vote is found there! Mhhossein (talk) 04:52, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not actually that well sourced. The DW article primarily focuses on the relation between the Assad regime and ISIS, and only briefly mentions that ISIS has conquered most of the Raqqa region. The Reuters article gives an in-depth overview of ISIS’s rule over Raqqa, but it never actually refers to the region as a Wilayat, nor in any way suggest that it is a legitimate political entity. The al-akbar source mentions this specific Wilayat once, but it is in quotation marks. It’s pretty clear that the only people who are actually treating this supposed Wilayat as a legitimate political entity are ISIS militants. Just claiming that some parcel of land under your control is not enough to establish notability. If it were, every micronation ever created would have an article. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 00:31, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Another Wilayat redirect has been nominated for deletion at [2].Spirit of Eagle (talk) 00:32, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: At least 20 similar articles have now been deleted with the redirects deleted as well through 5 or more deletion discussions. SNOW this. Legacypac (talk) 19:00, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - article is sourced and referred to as raqqa province. The article is informative and looking at a google search, there is plenty to write about. Mbcap (talk) 19:26, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's like wack-a-mole. Will be nominating Wilayat ar-Raqqah (ISIL) for deletion now. Legacypac (talk) 02:19, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See this large group deletion [[3]] and the various other related deletion discussions linked off of it. Creating this redirect is quite against community consensus. There are few to zero RS saying this name even exists. And that there is an article for the city that covers anything that this redirect or the alternate spelling it points to should cover. We don't do new articles for every city or province a rebel group seizes.Legacypac (talk) 02:58, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When you search "Wilayat ar-Raqqah" you mainly get direct references like this [4] (quoting an ISIL magazine) and this ISIL dabiq magazine and another issue of Islamic State News, published by ISIL's propoganda center. Everything on the first page of Google results is either direct links to ISIL propaganda or quotes from it, or twitter etc which are not RS. An example preview "IS's Islamic Services Committee that has been organized to help IS achieve its goal of “caring for the residents of Wilayat Ar-Raqqah" - sure "caring for the residents" by executing, putting in jail, flogging, raping etc etc. If you really want this article, it needs an h at the end to be correct according to the official ISIL publications. Legacypac (talk) 03:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment According to GNG, significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject should be included. A more in-depth discussion might conclude that the topic actually should not have a stand-alone article—perhaps because it violates what Wikipedia is not, particularly the rule that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.^[1] Mhhossein (talk) 19:39, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

^ Moreover, not all coverage in reliable sources constitutes evidence of notability for the purposes of article creation; for example, directories and databases, advertisements, announcements columns, and minor news stories are all examples of coverage that may not actually support notability when examined, despite their existence as reliable sources.

Previously deleted through AfD or various speedy deletion criteria

Wilayat Homs (ISIL)
Wilayat Haleb (ISIL)
Wilayat Fallujah (ISIL)
Wilayat Baghdad Al Shamaliye (ISIL)
Wilayat Baghdad (ISIL)
Wilayat North Baghdad (ISIL)
Wilayat Salah al-Din (ISIL)
Wilayat Nineveh (ISIL)
Wilayat Al Janoob (ISIL)
Wilayat Al Barakah (ISIL)
Wilayat Al Kheir (ISIL)
Wilayat Al Badiya (ISIL)
Wilayat Homs (ISIL)
Wilayat Idlib (ISIL)
Wilayat al-Sahel (ISIL)
Wilayat Fallujah (ISIL)
Wilayat Haleb (ISIL)
Wilayat al-Anbar (ISIL)
Wilayat al-Sina (ISIL)
Wilayat al-Sinai (ISIL)
Template:Wilayats of ISIL
Wilayat al-Dimashq (ISIL)
Wilayat al-Furat (ISIL)
List of Caliphs of the Islamic State
ISIL Caliphate
List of Islamic State Wilayahs
Wilayat Hama (ISIL)
Wilayat al-Dimashq (ISIL)
Wilayat Barqah (ISIL)

Closed Deletion Discussions

Under Nomination for Deletion or Redirected

Wilayat Algeria (ISIL) at https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_December_29#Wilayat_Algeria_.28ISIL.29
Wilayat Algeria - redirected away from the ISIL linked Algerian terror group as its a real place, a province of Algeria

(a remark by Legacypac).

Delete - I think the nominator hits the nail on the head here, and there is plenty of prior precedent. The article definitely is not well sourced (five sources is well sourced?); I'm not sure Al-Akhbar is a RS, and even if it is, it makes a grand total of one mention of "Wilayat al-Raqqa", I don't see how a Middle East Security Report suggests notability, the dw.de source barely references the city, let alone "Wilayat al-Raqqa", Reuters don't mention "Wilayat al-Raqqa" once, and the book source present in the article cites "Wikimedia" as a source. Almost everywhere talks about the city, whilst barely anywhere talks about "Wilayat al-Raqqa". Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:06, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and delete all related/similar. --Раціональне анархіст (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and delete all related/similar. Non-notable territorial claim by a terrorist organization or original research. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 20:13, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closing Admin: Please deleted the misspelled redirect pointed at this article as well. [5] Legacypac (talk) 16:42, 3 January 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.

[1] Moreover, not all coverage in reliable sources constitutes evidence of notability for the purposes of article creation; for example, directories and databases, advertisements, announcements columns, and minor news stories are all examples of coverage that may not actually support notability when examined, despite their existence as reliable sources.

[1]