Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reactions to the 2019 Pulwama attack

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|Reactions to the 2019 Pulwama attack}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Reactions_to_the_2019_Pulwama_attack Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Reactions to the 2019 Pulwama attack}})

Unneeded spin-off from the main article (2019 Pulwama attack), don't see any reason for a separate article for now. Gotitbro (talk) 10:41, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose, Reactions section was larger than the article. The real solution is to stop making long Reactions sections, and to stop abusing flagicons by putting them in Reactions sections. Abductive (reasoning) 10:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

:From what I know "reaction" articles have been created for only highly covered international events and I don't see this being the case right now (WP:TOOSOON). The article is about an ongoing event some discrepancies are going to be there such as the reaction being too long. I don't see the notability of a separate reaction article for now. Gotitbro (talk) 10:52, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

::"Highly covered" Do you want me to cite tons of international news sources that covered this? 119.82.70.109 (talk) 10:56, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

• What about Reactions to the November 2015 Paris attacks, Reactions to the September 11 attacks 119.82.70.109 (talk) 10:45, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.