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. ✗plicit 14:17, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2021 Sunamganj violence (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

partially Notable but the quality of the article is very poor and there are like hundreds of such events of violence against this community and that but this event was not reflected much after the incident, users can create thousands of pages on the same topic but at a different date in just a day but its not done due to issues with relevance, i searched for sources which reflects on this incident which is atleast 3 months after but i couldn't find much. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 11:10, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam, Hinduism, and Bangladesh. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 11:10, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: No. The quality of the article isn’t all that bad; every sentence is backed by a reliable source. Your claim that “users can create thousands of pages on the same topic” isn’t true, because users can never create thousands of pages on the same topic. What do you mean by “its not done due to issues with relevance”? What exactly “happened after 3 months”? What on earth have you written? Somajyoti ✉ 11:20, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  See the article for yourself alright? When i meant "same topic", i meant that events of violence which is the topic of this article, thousands of articles can be created on a similar topic Because incidents of violence occur every day, just check the news, some even result in deaths, but impact matters. what I meant by relevance is that the article is not relevant unless you give a good argument to prove such, and i think you misunderstood my statement a lot, I searched online and offline for any newspapers or books that mention this topic after the incident ended to see if it is reflected on, oh ok you said "What on earth have you written", Should i say it again or do you want a list of what I wrote, make it clear. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 02:29, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The nominator has failed to make a case why the sourcing situation is insufficient. Cortador (talk) 11:42, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Delete[double !vote by nominator] - Then explain yourself Alright? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 02:25, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  BangladeshiEditorInSylhet, you've nominated quite a few articles for deletion without appropriate rationales. Take the criticism constructively; articles don't get deleted for poor quality, they get tagged with cleanup templates. Also, is there a reason that after making the noms, you sometimes reply with a different signature, like in this case, Macarius Ibne Mito? It appears misleading. jolielover♥talk 17:11, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The different signature? Macarius Ibne Mito is my real name, sometimes i use that signature or should I just keep one, ok fine i'll keep one and i know articles are not nominated for quality issues. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 03:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:47, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• per WP:N, can anyone give references on its impact? I'll be convinced that keeping is the better option then, like on its impact? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 10:51, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Have you performed a thorough WP:BEFORE? Multiple significant sources like Prothom Alo, TBS, and DW provide broad coverage indicating SIGCOV. A quick search shows notability is clearly met. Chronos.Zx (talk) 20:04, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:28, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep meeting WP:EVENT and WP:SIGCOV, with wide coverage in sources [Dhaka Tribune, Prothom Alo, TBS, and DW]. Chronos.Zx (talk) 19:59, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep qualifies for WP:GNG and widely covered also. Ahammed Saad (talk) 17:29, 7 May 2025 (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.