Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013 Seaside Park, New Jersey fire


 * 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. (non-admin closure) — ΛΧΣ  21  02:08, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

2013 Seaside Park, New Jersey fire

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Yet. Or ever. GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:41, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could explain why it is not notable? To some, a continuing ten-alarm blaze destroying the business district of a town might be notable. 71.178.184.73 (talk) 02:48, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep for now, at least. It appears that eight blocks and at least 32 businesses were destroyed. A bit of time will allow us to better assess its long-term notability.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  02:58, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep and to further comment on what User:Cullen328 said, not only eight blocks and 32 business but two cities (ok technically they are Boroughs) are now left in shambles because of this blaze. IMHO this does definitely meet all the criteria to be included in Wikipedia. TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 03:10, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Recent event, give it some days, should well qualify under WP:NEVENTS. Sam Sailor Sing 08:26, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:32, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:33, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:33, 13 September 2013 (UTC)   (see MfD --BDD (talk) 16:08, 19 September 2013 (UTC))


 * Delete Fails WP is not a newspaper policy, no demonstrated lasting significance this is at best a local news story only - WikiNews is the place for this. In addressing directly the need time to see if it is notable, main space is not for that, we don't create articles on every high school football player because we need time to see if they make the professional grade.  LGA talk  edits   09:22, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Retitle to "Funtown Pier" and expand into article on that pier, with the fire as a section of the article. This is as per other articles on Wikipedia that deal with pier fires, as one might see by searching for "pier fire" on the site. 68.37.254.48 (talk) 13:50, 13 September 2013 (UTC) &mdash;  Rickyrab. Yada yada yada 14:48, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep – Coverage about this event can currently be found on the main pages of sites such as CNN, the Guardian, and the Sydney Morning Herald, demonstrating international coverage, suggesting notability one would not find in a local news story. The UK and Australian papers refer to the boardwalk affected as "iconic" and "famous" respectively. Egsan Bacon (talk) 14:05, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * This was not the first major fire in Seaside Park history. The Freeman Pier (which occupied the same site that the Funtown Pier did afterwards) burned in June 1955. Did that fire get similar coverage or notability? &mdash; Rickyrab. Yada yada yada 14:51, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Without opinion about the current article, there does seem to be some lasting coverage of the 1955 Freeman Pier Fire, primarily due to the destruction of a well-renowned wooden carousel in the blaze. I'm uncertain whether sufficient sources would exist to support an independent article on the merits, however. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:36, 13 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, for now, merge later - I'm surprised that Funtown Pier doesn't have an article, with all the amusement park aficionados on wikipedia. The event would be better if incorporated into a larger article. It's definitely a notable event.  --George100 (talk) 16:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Greetings from Canada.  My wife is from New Jersey and is really emotionally affected by this event. A landmark has been destroyed that many people hold dear. Oruanaidh (talk) 16:06, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep 32 businesses were destroyed and Gov. Chris Christie toured the area, damages are estimated at multi millions of dollars. . All of this plus in depth coverage makes this pass WP:GNG. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:31, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment The difference between this fire and the one that occurred in 1955 is that the Internet did not exist nor did cable television so you didn't get as much in-depth coverage, also remember that news gathering organizations like the Associated Press, Reuters and United Press International didn't provide such coverage like they do now. So no the 1955 fire probably would not pass WP:GNG under today's standards but this fire definitely does because of the massive damage and news coverage. TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 16:52, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep, historic and noteworthy, thousands of secondary sources covered this. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:35, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Major event of historic importance. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 23:52, 18 September 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.