Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 County Clare 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   no consensus. Black Kite (t) (c) 22:00, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

2010 County Clare earthquake

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Wikipedia has no need for an article on each earthquake. It is not news and fails WP:EVENT. Mike moral  ♪♫  19:05, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong keep I am Ryan Kirkpatrick i was the one how put 2010 County Clare earthquake on the website for this reason. Western Europe do have earthquakes but Ireland don't have that many. Yes ok the quake that struck County Clare is weak but the United Kingdom, France, Norway Denmark and Poland do have eathquakes big or small but this eathquake that hit Ireland is one of the biggest one that has hit Ireland. The was felt by many people. So i plaese ask can you not to delete it. To show that the world were ever you are in the world there can be an earthqauke can happen anywere in the world and you ever no that the quake that hit County Clare can maybe happane again but bigger in later years time and as well i like that thank all the people how would like to keep 2010 County Clare earthquake on if you can fined any more Referece's or taik about past earthquakes that his hit the Republic of Ireland it would be very helpful. 7 ::27pm, 16 May 2010.
 * Delete WP:NOTNEWS. No lasting significance, local only. C628 (talk) 21:52, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep It acually may not be notable, but it still is the biggest earthquake in Ireland which was recorded. Zbase4 (talk) 23:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If it's not notable, then surely it should be deleted per that policy, or at least merged? I quote the notability policy: "A topic that is suitable for inclusion and has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject". This topic would seem to fail the Google test in that regard. There are very few relevant results, even fewer are reliable sources. Tempodivalse   [talk]  14:45, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Use better keywords riffic (talk) 15:21, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That link would appear to have even fewer relevant results. I've only been able to find about ten-fifteen reliable-looking web pages (most of which were news services) that have any mention on the topic, which suggests it simply isn't noteworthy enough in the long run. Tempodivalse   [talk]  19:14, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak delete perhaps the biggest to hit Ireland, but 2.7 is pretty small and I don't see much more than that in terms of notability.  — fetch ·  comms   01:01, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete; appears to fail notability guidelines. Quick Google search reveals few links to reliable sources and this doesn't seem to have had any lasting historical significance. Tempodivalse   [talk]  01:34, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep due to rarity of earthquakes in this region, this may more notable than initially suspected. Sourcing can be improved, I'm adding a few to the article now to beef it up a bit. riffic (talk) 07:40, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - notability established as strongest recorded in Republic of Ireland and the fact that it was actually felt. Mjroots2 (talk) 08:39, 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) 09:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep It's the strongest earthquake there in years, and although minor, this makes it somewhat notable. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:16, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 *  Strong Weak keep Well-referenced, and of of clear encyclopedic value - if someone wants to know more about earthquakes in Ireland, and consults wikipedia, here's one of the articles that is relevant.  Lova Falk     talk   17:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * CommentHow is it encyclopedic? It lacks historical context, it is a news article at best, and the best source for geological occurrences is the USGS and other similar groups. Mike  moral  ♪♫  05:58, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. A merge to an article about earthquakes in Ireland would be appropriate if one is created, since the reason the infobox got filled out was that Ireland is geologically stable. Merge to Great Glen Fault, since it's the strongest earthquake there in  years (actually, the first source says "in recent months").  The magnitude of 2.7 on the moment magnitude scale will not be much different than the Richter scale.  .  Per Richter magnitude scale there are hundreds of quakes in the the 2.0 to 3.9 range-- not just per year put per day.  There is plenty of support today for keeping the article about this recent event in the English-speaking world, but the true test of whether it fails WP:NOTNEWS will be in trying to find any mention of it in June.  There is a place for this, but it's not in its own article. Mandsford 19:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:30, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:30, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I fail to see why anyone thinks a mere 2.7 'quake is considered notable. There are hundreds of these daily, so does Wikipedia really need an article for each? It is utterly pointless. If someone wanted a resource documenting the hundreds of earthquakes that occur each day, consult a geological service or institution. An encyclopedia is meant to document notable events. this event killed none was was likely not felt by a majority of the Irish in the area. Why should a 2.7 earthquake have its own article? It should not; there is not reason for it to have one. So before you !vote take my rambling comment in consideration. I've also noticed a tread of keeping articles when there are dead or injured people. I believe there were none, so doesn't this make the article simple a news article like one would find on Wikinews or CNN? I certainly believe that. Isn't Wikipedia not a news source? It does say in the policy WP:NOT. — Mike moral  ♪♫  05:27, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Size isn't everything, and lack of deaths does not mean that an event is non-notable. Sure, a 2.7 quake in San Francisco wouldn't be notable. This is notable because of the location, being the largest recorded there. A clear case of not applying a blanket rule and taking each case on its own merits. Mjroots (talk) 10:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Then why not merge to Ireland or the fault article (whatever the title is). Mike  moral  ♪♫  02:33, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. A minor earthquake, basically falls under WP:NOT. If there is still coverage 8-10 months from now, an article might be warranted then. Nsk92 (talk) 12:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:NotNews and per not an earthquake, 2.7, 10 seconds and no one noticed. Snappy (talk) 19:33, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * comment i'm going to jump right out and say this: the !votes for wp:notnews should be considered inapplicable, as this isn't a news report about a common event. This is a rare event in a region not known for earthquakes -- not your typical routine news event. riffic (talk) 23:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * For whatever reason, 2010 has seen a dramatic increase in the number of articles created as soon as a tremor is noticed. Category:21st-century earthquakes shows 49 so far for the first five months of 2010, compared to 32 for all of '09, 20+ in '07 and '08, 12 in '06.  There were actually more than 49, since at least eight quake pages have been deleted when it turned out that they were not mentioned after the original news reports.  The reasonable alternative, particularly in underscoring the point that Ireland is not known for earthquakes, would be to create an article called Earthquakes in Ireland.  There's a Great Glen Fault page that might be the place this would be preserved.  The earthquake project is working on alternatives (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Earthquakes) to the current system, whereby one creates a page called "2010 ______ earthquake" and then hopes it won't be deleted. I hope that the 2010 event can be put on a page with other instances of quakes in Ireland.  WP:PRESERVE doesn't mean that each event has to have its own unique page.  Mandsford 23:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * oh I totally agree, merging would be more preferable than outright deletion. riffic (talk) 00:08, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Oh, please. A 2.7 earthquake? Lasting 10 seconds? No damage or injuries? You can't even feel a 2.7 unless you are sitting on top of it. If we start creating articles about 2.7 earthquakes, we would be creating literally dozens of articles a day in the part of the world where I live - hundreds a day worldwide. This minor quake was unusual for that small area of Ireland, is the most that can be said about it. BTW Riffic, you argue that this is "not a news report" but rather a "rare event" - but news reports are almost by definition "rare events". It's what makes them news. --MelanieN (talk) 00:38, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW if the article is deleted, as I think it should be, a paragraph about the earthquake could be added to the Geology section of Ireland. --MelanieN (talk) 00:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - 2.7? I've slept through 100 times worse, literally. WP:NOTNEWS, at most it deserves a small mention in the Geology of Ireland as stated above. Events that are rare only in particular location should only be included in the appropriate location article.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 21:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Normally, earthquakes under a 6.0 are not kept after AfD.  However, we should consider if "It is the first time we've had seismic activity in that part of the country..." matters.  I do not know. Bearian (talk) 21:55, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Actually it was not necessarily the first seismic activity in that area; it was the first seismic activity recorded in that area since they began to keep records in 1978. 32 years is trivial in geologic time. And despite comments above to the effect that this was "the biggest recorded earthquake in Ireland", the article does not say that - it only says that it was the biggest recorded in WESTERN Ireland. --MelanieN (talk) 23:50, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:NOTNEWS No enduring notability. Consider WikiNews. Aditya Ex Machina  08:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Probably NOTNEWS when seen in a global context, but most likely quite notable in Ireland.-- Pink Bull  17:18, 23 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.