Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Algeria earthquake


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 21:58, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

2010 Algeria earthquake

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

It is not news and fails WP:EVENT. Mike moral  ♪♫  19:26, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete unless further sources crop up that actually establish its notability.  — fetch ·  comms   00:52, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * comment I have found several sources in French (not a surprising development) from local sources:, , (I am NOT surprised not to find many sources in English). Far as I can tell from a cursory look, although there was quite significant damage, the number of dead remained low because it hit a lesser populated region. Circéus (talk) 01:59, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. That people died and were injured, there was damage, and more than one reliable source from another continent  refer to this in the English language (plus the many in other languages) ought to be enough. --  can  dle • wicke  03:11, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Earthquake with fatalies and many WP:RS.  Lugnuts  (talk) 07:47, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 *  Keep The template indicates that we do record notable earthquakes as a matter of course. There's probably some scope for consolidating this content but our editing policy is that we do not use deletion for such work. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:49, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've dropped a note on the Earthquake Project's talk page to try and get some policy, along the lines of WP:AIRCRASH, for earthquake notability.  Lugnuts  (talk) 09:52, 16 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep and delete all other non-fatal earthquakes of 2010-- DA I (Δ) 12:11, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep&mdash;Satisfies notability req's.&mdash;RJH (talk) 17:33, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Although we have waaayyy too many earthquake articles, not all of these gift-wrapped infoboxes are deficient. Quakes that are strong enough to cause a fatality are, actually, relatively rare.  Glad to see that Lugnuts is taking the lead in trying to help the Earthquake Project come up with some reasonable guidelines.  WP:SNOW yet?  Mandsford 18:44, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:33, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:34, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep but only if the title is changed (sth like Bouira 05/14/2010 earthquake should be fine). There are, on average, 14 magnitude 5 or greater earthquakes per year in Algeria, thus the title is inappropriate. Otherwise (if the title isn't changed), the article should be Deleted. Omar-Toons (talk) 07:59, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Although I am sure that in Algeria itself, people would immediately recognize Bouira, the rest of the world would not. Even al-Asnam, a large city and site of a massive earthquake (I believe in 1980), isn't well known in the rest of the world.  The 1989 earthquake in San Francisco is, technically, the "1989 Loma Prieta earthquake", but most people wouldn't recognize "Loma Prieta" as a place they could find on a map.  The primary purpose of any encyclopedia is as a ready reference for people to consult, and titles should be written to aid the readers, rather than to impress the experts.  For someone who wishes to find out more about a deadly earthquake that they have heard about that happened in Algeria in 2010, they would, logically, look under "2010 Algeria Earthquake".  Mandsford 03:24, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.