Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2006 Snow storm in Portugal: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
*'''Keep''', but delete the Portugal article. I have improved the article, so hopefully another weather event entry can be kept similar to the heat wave article. smr 09:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)smrgeog |
*'''Keep''', but delete the Portugal article. I have improved the article, so hopefully another weather event entry can be kept similar to the heat wave article. smr 09:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)smrgeog |
||
*'''Very strong keep'''. This was not normal weather...and of course it's a product of recentism. Why should we delete recent articles just because a similar cold wave 40 years ago would not have gotten an article? Honestly, it's outrageous that this should be considered for deletion at all. This killed, what 100+ people over there? And produced record cold and record snowfall in areas that don't normally see snowfall. If a similar event occurred in the United States, nobody would be freaking out over the inclusion of this article. This was a huge event in Europe; did anybody notice how much news coverage it got? However, I think that the snowstorm in Portugal article should be '''merged''' into 2006 European cold wave. If a fishspinner hurricane in the Atlantic Ocean can have an article, certainly this can as well. This is no less worthy of an article than the [[2006 North American heat wave]] (which killed a similar number of people and has no more "political consequences" than this did). [[User:Bob rulz|bob rulz]] 05:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC) |
*'''Very strong keep'''. This was not normal weather...and of course it's a product of recentism. Why should we delete recent articles just because a similar cold wave 40 years ago would not have gotten an article? Honestly, it's outrageous that this should be considered for deletion at all. This killed, what 100+ people over there? And produced record cold and record snowfall in areas that don't normally see snowfall. If a similar event occurred in the United States, nobody would be freaking out over the inclusion of this article. This was a huge event in Europe; did anybody notice how much news coverage it got? However, I think that the snowstorm in Portugal article should be '''merged''' into 2006 European cold wave. If a fishspinner hurricane in the Atlantic Ocean can have an article, certainly this can as well. This is no less worthy of an article than the [[2006 North American heat wave]] (which killed a similar number of people and has no more "political consequences" than this did). [[User:Bob rulz|bob rulz]] 05:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC) |
||
*!!!KEEP!!!I work for a weather data company and this is assuredly a memorable weather event. Definitely worth documentation. |
*!!!'''KEEP'''!!! I work for a weather data company and this is assuredly a memorable weather event. Definitely worth documentation. |
||
Revision as of 22:14, 16 August 2006
Given possible problems with the term coldwave, and the fact these articles seem to describe fairly normal weather, they are a product of recentism and don't appear to have ongoing encyclopedic value. Delete --Peta 03:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Delete
on the former; Delete on the latter:These events are quite trivial in the grand scheme of things, butthe former is less trivial than the latterI've seen worse. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 03:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC) - Delete as WP is not a newspaper. Yeah, it's not paper, but it's also not a newspaper. Tychocat 08:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. I don't see the problem mentioned by the nom. Both articles could function nicely within a more expansive article on 2006 weather patterns. --JJay 12:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete according to Tychocat. 2003 European heat wave produced a major political and public health catastrophe. These don't measure up. Gazpacho 02:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, but delete the Portugal article. I have improved the article, so hopefully another weather event entry can be kept similar to the heat wave article. smr 09:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)smrgeog
- Very strong keep. This was not normal weather...and of course it's a product of recentism. Why should we delete recent articles just because a similar cold wave 40 years ago would not have gotten an article? Honestly, it's outrageous that this should be considered for deletion at all. This killed, what 100+ people over there? And produced record cold and record snowfall in areas that don't normally see snowfall. If a similar event occurred in the United States, nobody would be freaking out over the inclusion of this article. This was a huge event in Europe; did anybody notice how much news coverage it got? However, I think that the snowstorm in Portugal article should be merged into 2006 European cold wave. If a fishspinner hurricane in the Atlantic Ocean can have an article, certainly this can as well. This is no less worthy of an article than the 2006 North American heat wave (which killed a similar number of people and has no more "political consequences" than this did). bob rulz 05:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- !!!KEEP!!! I work for a weather data company and this is assuredly a memorable weather event. Definitely worth documentation.