Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 Kazan explosion

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 No consensus, default to keep. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 11:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Kazan explosion

Not notable incident which happens that way almost daily and articles like this aree better placed at Wikinews. Matthiasb-DE (talk) 20:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not Notable. GeorgeLouis (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or possibly merge with Kazan. Pburka (talk) 20:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 20:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a newspaper. --Kannie | talk 20:44, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:48, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (as I'm a creator). It was second major tragedy in Russia since Arkhangelsk explosion of 2004. The information about this explosion had Russia-wide resonance. So, many tragedies, which has lesser fatal result or tyhe same are represented in wikipedia. So, if we have an article per every Guantanamo prisoner such as Airat Vakhitov, why we should avoid of such articles????--Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 15:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, if it will be decided to delete an article, could you place it at Wikinews, as I don't kow how to do it.--Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 15:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find that many articles from Category:Gas explosions depict events of the same importance, for instance North Division Street explosion.--Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 18:38, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The latter isn't notable as well. --Matthiasb-DE (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, clearly a notable incident. Everyking (talk) 05:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Eight fatalities is a fairly large disaster, and had the accident had happened in the United States or England, I think we would be keeping this without question. (For comparison see Charleston Sofa Super Store fire for example.) The large press coverage is sufficient to pass verifiability requirements. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:21, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, reasonably large disaster suspected to be terrorism, lot of independent coverage. Don't see the need to delete it Alex Bakharev (talk) 11:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable disaster.Biophys (talk) 00:25, 17 January 2008 (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.