Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011–12 Los Angeles arson attacks


 * 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   speedy close. The issue requires a merge discussion, not AfD. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:57, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

2011–12 Los Angeles arson attacks

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Okay, something needs to be done. There are two articles about this topic. This article ("2011-12") is a poorly written version that is mostly the work of one person, with content from the other article pasted in. The other article ("2011") is a little better written and less clunky.
 * Second:

Can we just get on one page here, folks? tedder (talk) 00:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Speedy close, this is not a matter for AFD. You already have agreement for a merger at Talk:2011–12 Los Angeles arson attacks; that can go ahead as soon as this AFD is closed.  Nyttend (talk) 00:36, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed Speedy close. Just merge to the location that consensus already exists to locate the article. - Yellowdesk (talk) 00:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note It's actually been redirected twice (last I checked; the count might be higher now), but the creating editor keeps reverting it back. This AFD may be the solution needed. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 00:44, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep The article has all the information as its twin and more and is worded better and more updated.--YummyDonutsmmm (talk) 01:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment sheesh… "worded better and more updated"—really? That ought to speak for itself, but your version comes with lots of speculation and unsourced claims, as well! And even better, you've now turned the other into a redirect to yours. Please consider just trying to work with the community. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 01:14, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete both of them, per WP:Notability (events). This should be at Wikinews, not here. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 01:17, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * This meets notability definately... $2 million dollars damage! Why can Wikipedia have articles about airplanes crashing with one death but not $2 million damage and the worst fires since 1992? BCS  (Talk) 01:54, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep both and merge them. Its too soon to tell if this is just a blip in the news or a legit encyclopedic topic. Close the afd and we can revisit it in a month or two when things become clearer. Umbralcorax (talk) 01:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I was the creator of the page currently being redirected. Here's my side: The article in question was written before I wrote the other because I couldn't find it, and thought there was no article about the event. So I wrote an article. I was notified on my talk page today that a page existed already but was told "your version is much better developed". -User:220 of Borg So I redirected the other page into mine with no discussion or letting the other user know (this is what it looked like before I made it a redirect. I then decided I liked the other title better, and left a note on the Admin's noticeboard about moving a page over a redirect (still no response). I then had RL things to do and when I came back I saw that he had basically copy-pasted my article to his title, added empty sections, redirected my page, without discussion. Now I have an ITN on hold, an AfD and an article to worry about.
 * I realize the mistakes I made and hopefully we can work this out... Maybe make a third title and redirect the other two into it. BCS  (Talk) 01:54, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, lead story on the national news. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 02:28, 3 January 2012 (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.