Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013 Saltsjöbanan train crash (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Probably it is just too early, the delete proponents may want to try in a couple of years, then we really know how significant it was.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:44, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

2013 Saltsjöbanan train crash
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

as per WP:EVENT and WP:PERSISTENCE. no long standing notability. a huge spike in coverage in January and February 2013 and now has effectively quietened. all the WP:CRYSTAL balling from the last AfD hasn't occured. no one died which makes less notable too. LibStar (talk) 04:12, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 December 3.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 04:12, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  04:26, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  04:26, 3 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - per Notability is not temporary.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:04, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Plenty of independent sources, and meets WP:GNG. Should not have been Proded. Bhtpbank (talk) 14:09, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:EVENT trumps WP:GNG. there is no persistent coverage to meet WP:EVENT. Justin Bieber just visited Sydney and got a lot of international coverage. we don't create articles for that either. LibStar (talk) 23:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 14:44, 3 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:109PAPERS. The fact that it caused a very brief spike in coverage during a couple of days in one month does not justify the article's retention, particularly as there is nothing WP:NOTABLE about the incident. Article also fails Notability (railway incidents). Lamberhurst (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Refering to Notability (railway incidents) is specious and misleading, as this proposal failed due to a lack of consensus. Furthermore, the guidelines for notability clearly state that notability is not temporary. - Bhtpbank (talk) 14:31, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per BabbaQ and Bhtpbank. This was and is notable because of a cleaner being accused of stealing a train - even though she was cleared of all blame. If all the relevant information on this were merged into Saltsjöbanan (the only logical target) then it would be significantly undue weight on a single incident. Thryduulf (talk) 19:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * "This was and is notable because of a cleaner being accused of stealing a train" is not a criterion of notability. really, a minor incident with one person injured. LibStar (talk) 23:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Notability is indeed not temporary, but in today's media world even a worldwide explosion of news coverage does not establish notability. There needs to be WP:PERSISTENCE, and of that, there is none. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:03, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * delete A flash in the pan due a questionable accusation, it has all but disappeared from view on-line if you ignore the initial burst of publicity. Keeping it is something of a BLP problem given that the woman accused was fairly quickly cleared. Mangoe (talk) 02:14, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete News coverage does not establish notability, fails WP:NOTNEWS & WP:PERSISTENCE.  LGA talk  edits   04:44, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It does not yet fail WP:PERSISTENCE. Reason: If an event is cited as a case study after the initial coverage has died down, then it is an indication of lasting significance. As there is a report being prepared, I suggest that this event will be remembered, and thus will continue to be notable. -Bhtpbank (talk) 14:35, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * "will be remembered" that is WP:CRYSTAL balling. LibStar (talk) 23:11, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

*Keep - Once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage. Bhtpbank (talk) 10:06, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * you have already !voted. LibStar (talk) 10:18, 4 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - notability is not temporary. PERSISTENCE arguments are premature, investigations take many months to complete, following which a report will be published. Mjroots (talk) 10:51, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * it has been almost 11 months since the event, what report are you referring to? Are you basing notability on some report that has received no coverage? LibStar (talk) 14:39, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The Statens Haverikommission are investigating the accident. Nothing should be read into the fact that it has taken eleven months so far and no report has been produced. Eighteen months to two years is a far more realistic timescale. In the UK, the RAIB has investigations dating back to June 2012 open. Mjroots (talk) 17:16, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * you are WP:CRYSTAL balling saying this event will be notable when a future report is released? you can't presume notability on the basis of that. LibStar (talk) 22:55, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I'm saying notability has already been established, and that ir will be strengthened when the final report is released. Mjroots (talk) 23:27, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

"will be" says it all. LibStar (talk) 23:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Not a routine news report (a train crash with people injured is not everyday news), thus passing WP:NEVENT; plenty of coverage. -- cyclopia speak! 16:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * yes according to WP:NEVENT, this does not meet WP:LASTING, WP:GEOSCOPE and WP:PERSISTENCE. LibStar (talk) 06:08, 9 December 2013 (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.