Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Ecuador 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   delete. 7.3 earthquakes are not inherently notable; the proposed earthquake notability guidelines have not gained widespread consensus. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:42, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

2010 Ecuador earthquake

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable earthquake. No casualties.  Diego Grez  what's up? 16:07, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. — Mike moral  ♪♫  16:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom JeremyMcClean (talk) 17:08, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ecuador-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:16, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:17, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Has a magnitude of 7.3 and has WP:RS. If that had happened in a heavily populated place, the death toll would be massive. Compare the 7.0 in Haiti.  Lugnuts  (talk) 17:28, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * But it did not. The magnitude of the earthquake does not make it inherently notable, and no casualties occurred.  Diego Grez  what's up?  17:36, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. Its 7.3 magnitude alone does not make it notable in the absence of a significant impact, like casualties. --18:29, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete If it could be shown that earthquakes of this magnitude are way out of the ordinary for Ecuador, possibly it could be notable. As it is, "2010 Ecuador earthquake" produces quite a few ghits - with varying dates so obviously not all the same one. This one also is given different strengths, 7.1 in the article, 7.3 above, and 6.9 by the BBC. I don't get the feeling that any particular quake merits the title of "2010 Ecuador earthquake" to the exclusion of all others. Peridon (talk) 19:19, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep 7.3 is notable.Starzynka (talk) 19:52, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Starzynka. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:05, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep 7.3 is notable. scope_creep (talk) 01:58, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep under the "Rule of 7"... Carrite (talk) 05:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * with a bonus Comment - Earthquake documentationists, please make an effort at providing the world with more than one line and a map. Put some pride into your work! Carrite (talk) 05:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete as Wikipedia isn't a place for news reports. No evidence of lasting impact. That it's magnitude was 7.3 doesn't change this. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  12:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This earthquake does not meet the proposed guidelines for notability at WikiProject Earthquakes, note that deep or intermediate focus earthquakes (this one was >200 km) are normally excluded if they do no significant damage. I will add this to the List of earthquakes in Ecuador that I am currently constructing. Mikenorton (talk) 16:45, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note that its entry in the list article has more information than this separate article - it is unneccessary. Mikenorton (talk) 14:20, 24 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. The USGS shakemap is green-blue - so this is notable as a magn. 3.0 quake. The depth is all that matters. Also, warn the creator he is making a mess with his creations see his talk page.-- DA I (Δ) 12:37, 24 August 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.