Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/April 2022 Belgorod and Bryansk attacks

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. Consensus is that something notable happened, whatever it was, and that POV issues can be addressed by editing and/or renaming the article, subject to consensus. Sandstein 07:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022 Belgorod and Bryansk attacks

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Entirely based on Russian Government claims while Ukraine has denied conducting the attacks. Viewsridge (talk) 10:00, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, History, Military, Europe, Russia, and Ukraine. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:03, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - does not appear to be notable. Volunteer Marek 14:07, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Klimovo's article; should be documented although the fact that this is its own article fails WP:GNG. Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 16:42, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I presume that means into Klimovo, Bryansk Oblast. The article now covers numerous incidents unrelated to Klimovo. —Michael Z. 16:47, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is there proof that the attacks happened? If so, they're notable enough no matter who did them. Jim Michael (talk) 17:43, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There were videos of the aftermath of the attack. Of course the Ukrainians are crying false flag rhetoric, but the event did indeed take place, and considering that it pissed off the Russians enough for them to "warn" about further attacks, this article should be kept. 2601:85:C101:C9D0:E84F:38C8:581F:8496 (talk) 18:02, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would also like to add that the Ukrainian government, backed by Western media by and large, is just as susceptible to lying as the Russian government, and them denying involvement in this border incident is just as spurious as the Russians denying their intention to invade Ukraine last year. 2601:85:C101:C9D0:E84F:38C8:581F:8496 (talk) 18:06, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTAFORUM. Volunteer Marek 18:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And? My point is that Ukraine denying these attacks, while video evidence corroborates the existence of such attacks, is not grounds to delete this article. Your comment is confusing. 2601:85:C101:C9D0:E84F:38C8:581F:8496 (talk) 18:15, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Who's responsible for the attack is completely irrelevant to the WP:NOTABILITY of this article and whether it should be kept or not. Volunteer Marek 18:24, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The explosions still happened regardless of who is responsible. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:05, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Of course the Ukrainians are crying false flag rhetoric" This statement of yours does not follow NPOV i'm afraid. Due to fog of war there is nothing enough to prove if this is a "false flag" or not. Statements like "Ukrainians are as susceptible to lying as the Russian government" are manipulating users into a political discussion on whether if this a false flag, which is not what this nomination of deletion is entirely about. There are other reasons such as neutrality and notibility. Sgnpkd (talk) 18:23, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I understand my comment seemed to have angered Volunteer Marek. I am not "manipulating" (rather accusatory?), I was attempting to rebut Viewsridge's point that the attack is just a Russian gov claim and denied by Ukraine, implying the event was nonexistent. It most certainly did happen, and it is notable because this specific attack led to the Russians publicly threatening to hit "decision-making centers" in Kiev, which to my knowledge they did a day or two afterwards, and will continue to do so. This is notable because it led to a direct reaction from Russia, it's not just a random explosion (and Russia so far isn't being shelled every day). Your point about neutrality is curious, since that would relate to the question of responsibility, which you insist is not part of this discussion. I'll go along, but considering the Russian reaction (and from pro-Russian sources there is/was a lot of chatter about this attack in particular), the article is notable. 2601:85:C101:C9D0:D454:650:1A03:EDF7 (talk) 20:38, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mean to reply to myself but here is a source talking about Russia's reaction/POV:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/powerful-explosions-heard-kyiv-after-russian-warship-sinks-2022-04-15/ 2601:85:C101:C9D0:D454:650:1A03:EDF7 (talk) 20:43, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have not "angered me". I only pointed out that who is responsible for this attack is completely irrelevant to whether it's notable or not. Volunteer Marek 00:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I am actually seeing these attacks covered in a wide range of sources on the article from Reuters to the Times of Israel. If the article has a WP:NPOV problem then it needs to be addressed by adding information from both side's point of view. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:31, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We have some occasional statements by the authorities of both sides and some news coverage, but nothing durable is left by these supposed incidents, and the sources do not provide any analysis allowing us to write a tolerable article, not a quilt bag of several contradictory claims. Wikisaurus (talk) 01:57, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete With 7 injuries, notability is low. Even if it is proven that Ukraine shelled the village, this would not be the first time it retaliate into Russian territory during this war. The scale of the shelling is very small compared to other operations of the war. Unless this is an important cassus-belli for a significant, future Russian action, otherwise not notable. There is no point for creating an article for each explosions and shelling during the war, otherwise we would have dozens articles a day. Sgnpkd (talk) 18:14, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Casualty estimates do not serve as a standard of notability. WP:NOTBIGENOUGH.

The incident was also followed by Russian shellings of locations in Ukraine, which included an attack on Kyiv even though Russia had previously agreed to withdraw from that city's oblast. The significance of such a decision is rather notable. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 02:41, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At this point any link between Bryansk etc and the shelling of Kyiv is at best speculative (most sources that comment on it say it's in revenge for the Moskva). Volunteer Marek 06:26, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The fact that Ukraine has denied conducting the attacks doesn't mean that the event never happened at all. Claims coming from both sides, as well as the supposed video evidence, received notable coverage in the media. I agree that there is no point in creating an article for each explosion during the war, however, cross-border shellings, especially with (alleged) injuries, don't happen every day. VanHelsing.16 (talk) 13:24, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep 1. Doesn't mean it never happened. 2. An apparent spillover regardless of who did it. Dawsongfg (talk) 05:32, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and rename, first merge into Attack on Belgorod and then rename that to 2022 explosions in Belgorod to create a single article covering all events with a WP:NPOV title. Buttons0603 (talk) 14:34, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What about Bryansk then? It's a separate region that was also allegedly attacked. VanHelsing.16 (talk) 08:17, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And Bryansk, then. I don't know (or care to learn) Russian regions. Whatever the title, one article is enough to cover it all. Buttons0603 (talk) 23:56, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The most important attacks happened in Bryansk Oblast, not Belgorod Oblast. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 13:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

.."Attack on Belgorod" is NPOV, otherwise like 500 or something articles need to be renamed.. Dawsongfg (talk) 03:45, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep to be honest, i think its better to keep this the way it is at least for now. 187.39.133.201 (talk) 18:44, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Covered by a number of RS, any NPOV issues can he addressed. EkoGraf (talk) 14:25, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- We are not in a position to judge whether they were (or were not) real. Even if it was a false flag attack, that would be notable. I would not oppose renaming and merging per Buttons0603. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:55, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this poor article and rewrite to sort out the severe NPOV issues to do with dominant narratives. Springnuts (talk) 08:40, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Let's concentrate on notability issues - are the events notable?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 09:48, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Fair point: fwiw my Keep above is for sufficient sourcing for notability of the events. Springnuts (talk) 19:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In dept coverage in secondary sources is now available. See for instance: Zit Oekraïne achter explosies, branden en sabotageacties in Rusland?. 82.174.61.58 (talk) 11:27, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This has been reported in the news, and is part of a larger pattern of explosions and fires. There is evidence it was related to the war and the Ukrainian response was not a pure denial but an ambiguous troll. —Michael Z. 22:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Of course Keep -- These are notable incidents. Something certainly happened. I do not think we know for certain who did it. Some of the content may well be subject to POV issues, but the solution to that is to edit the disputed issues out or (at worst) to set out the rival positions. Russia has a motive to stage a false flag incident. Ukraine might have wanted to degrade Russian resources that might be used against it, but want to deny it, just as Russia is denying what it apparently did during its occupation of territoery near Kyiv. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:27, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This afd has taken nearly a month's time with a clear consensus against a deletion. Could someone just close the discussion already and move on? Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 17:04, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Springnuts (talk) 08:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am seeing links to sources saying something occurred, but would like to see discussion of whether those are mere mentions or actual indications of notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 17:21, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Even if it's fake, we can just rename it to "April 2022 Western Russia attacks allegations" although I don't think this is fake. CR-1-AB (talk) 04:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename, to 2022 Ukrainian attacks on Russia or 2022 Western Russia attacks, also merge Attack on Belgorod. GWA88 (talk) 14:59, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename per above, multiple reliable sources cover this, and while comparatively minor to what else has happened it has the potential to be a big event in the war. Rename might be desirable as the truth of the events is revealed, neutral on what that new title should be. Inter&anthro (talk) 02:23, 3 May 2022 (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.