Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 Atlantic hurricane season


 * 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. No consensus to Delete with a strong consensus that the topic will be notable; on the balance between Keep vs. Redirect (the main consideration in such pre-notable event situations), the consensus was to Keep on the basis that the article already contains sufficient sourced information that is useful to readers. (non-admin closure) Britishfinance (talk) 01:20, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

2020 Atlantic hurricane season

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per WP:TOOSOON. There has been constant edit warring as to whether this article should stay or not and it is finally time that there is a definitive answer. Thanks. Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 16:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 16:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. 2020 is almost here, so a preliminary article about the 2020 Hurricane Season is justified if it contains the first forecast for the upcoming season. The creation date for previous seasons was around now for this reason, see for instance these Hurricane Season histories: Season 2019 created on Dec. 11, 2018 and Season 2018 created on December 7, 2017. Furthermore, this is exactly the same as for 2020 Summer Olympics which is more than 7 months away and has an article. It is quite ironic that the same Users argue year after year for the date of creation and end up creating it by the middle of December! Pierre cb (talk) 17:29, 15 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Redirect and Protect - I do not personally see the need to create the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season article yet, as I can not see it being populated with any major content for a couple of months yet unless a system develops off season. I note that a few predictions about the season from TSR and CSU have come out already and that the list of names are known, however, I do not feel that it is that important to have an article on the season until April 2020 when more predictions come out. I would also suggest that we protect the article in order to ensure that it isnt recreated until April, as we have had several editors recreate the article at the wrong time.Jason Rees (talk) 17:18, 15 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete (for now) - there can't be anything meaningful said about this topic without violating WP:CRYSTAL. Agricolae (talk) 18:15, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:CRYSTAL doesn't apply here. Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. That is absolutely the case here. WP:CRYSTAL means we should avoid speculating about future events, but here we have a list of names and a sourced prediction, and even if there are somehow no tropical storms next summer the topic will still be notable. Total waste of time nomination. SportingFlyer  T · C  18:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The nomination doesn't mention WP:CRYSTAL. Thanks, Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 19:05, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Another !voter mentioned WP:CRYSTAL. The nomination only references WP:TOOSOON, which is an essay. This is now a notable topic and it shouldn't be deleted, only to recreate it again in what, two weeks? SportingFlyer  T · C  19:21, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I dont see why we need to recreate it in two weeks time when the season doesnt offically start until June 1 and we only have 1 prediction that gives numbers. Personally when further predictions are released with numbers in April seems about right time unless a system happens to develop in the mean time.Jason Rees (talk) 19:48, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Because, as I've noted below, in two weeks this becomes the active season (even though it's not "official" until 1 June) so any "it's in the future" arguments become moot. SportingFlyer  T · C  19:58, 15 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. It's coming, unless the world ends in the next 16 days six months, so why are we bothering to waste our time? Clarityfiend (talk) 19:42, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Why do we need an article on the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season this early when it doesn't start until June 1? Jason Rees (talk) 19:48, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Because we're two weeks away from having the season be the active season, and as I noted above we're allowed to have articles if the topic is notable and almost certain to take place. There's no reason not to have an article on the nearly-active season at this point, even though it's just a list of names and a prediction. SportingFlyer  T · C  19:57, 15 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Redirect If going by the list of names is all we need, then we should have articles for hurricane seasons all the way out to 2024. The list of names at Tropical cyclone naming is perfectly adequate for now. Aside from the names, we only have one seasonal outlook, and having an article based on that could violate WP:CRYSTAL. For the same reason we don't currently have Tornadoes of 2020, nor should we until at least January 1, even though there will certainly be tornadoes next year. TornadoLGS (talk) 19:59, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is more than just the naming list. Having the one seasonal outlook is enough content for me. It won't be a WP:CRYSTAL violation, as we know that the season will begin next June 1st. If there are no storms, then the 2020 article will discuss the historic aberration of having no storms in a season. Barring that, the article should be kept and developed organically as more information develops. Every year around this time we create the next season's article, usually when the first forecasts happens. That happened in on 12/11/2018 for 2019's article, 12/7/2017 for 2018's article. There was an RFD in 2016 for the 2017 AHS article, which agreed that the article should be created based on the existence of the seasonal forecasts, as well as a lengthy discussion on the talk page whether to make the article (which wasn't exactly resolved, instead it led to a lot of discussion). I don't want there to be another discussion in the near future of when it's appropriate to make the article for a scheduled recurring event, especially as we have the first forecast out. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 20:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand that WP:Crystal doesn't apply to the the list of names and official beginning of the season on June 1st, but what of the TSR forecast? It seems that forecast is the only reason this article isn't just a redirect. I've always been iffy on creating these articles on the basis of forecasts. Also WP:OSE applies here; perhaps starting past hurricane season articles early was misguided. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:44, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Why would WP:CRYSTAL apply to the forecast? SportingFlyer  T · C  20:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * When you get down to the basics, it's a weather forecast. It may come from an expert source, but weather forecasts aren't exactly well-known for their accuracy. Should we be starting articles on this basis any more than we should start tornado outbreak articles based on SPC outlooks? TornadoLGS (talk) 21:02, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The fact it's a forecast is irrelevant, it's still a source which specifically discusses the 2020 hurricane season. When would you suggest creating this article? SportingFlyer  T · C  23:34, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * At the absolute earliest, January 1. I'm pretty much neutral to possibly starting it later. TornadoLGS (talk) 00:25, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I could see waiting until June 1 or the formation of the first depression, whichever comes first, but that may be confusing the people searching for information. TornadoLGS (talk) 02:53, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Why are you trying to institute some sort of rule for the earliest the article can be created? Articles for future Olympics were created because of the possibility of future bids being made, due to the preparations that must be made ahead of time. Wikipedia documents those preparations and the beforehand work as humans prepare for our inevitable future. There will be a 2020 Atlantic hurricane season. According to TSR, it will be fairly active. Yes, I think a single source discussing a future season merits creating the article, as it will be the first of many (based on many years of precedent). As for waiting til June 1 as opposed to January 1, consider this: since Wikipedia was created, 11 out of 19 seasons had a pre-season storm. If we wait until the first storms, we are too late for curious readers who want to know whatever there is to know about a future event. We know what naming list there will be, and we know when the season will officially begin. Do you disagree with any of this assessment? ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:20, 16 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep- WP:CRYSTAL dosent apply here since 2020 is just a few weeks away. Andrew Base (talk) 05:20, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * as said before, WP:CRYSTAL was never mentioned in the nomination. Please read properly and re consider. Thanks, Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 10:21, 16 December 2019 (UTC)


 * , hi Will, WP:TOOSOON dosent apply here either as stated Season 2019 created on Dec. 11, 2018 and Season 2018 created on December 7, 2017, so there is no problem if the 2020 season is created in December 2019. Andrew Base (talk) 10:49, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS? Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 13:14, 16 December 2019 (UTC)


 * , Will there are more reasons why the article should be kept:
 * It is a notable topic and it is highly unlikely there will be no storms next year, even if there are no storms the topic will still be notable.
 * For example the 2030 FIFA World Cup article exists because the topic is notable even though there may not be enough sources at this time, same applies here.
 * For this reasons I think the article should be kept and shouldn't have been nominated for deletion. Andrew Base (talk) 15:21, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * By the looks of it, there is more information on the 2030 FIFA World cup than there is on the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season. There is plenty of information on bids by various countries. All we have for the hurricanes is a list of names, which only justifies inclusion at Tropical cyclone naming and one weather forecast, which should not be the basis for an article. The 2020 Atlantic hurricane season will be notable and will get an article whether storms form or not, but it is certain that we won't get any of them until 2020. TornadoLGS (talk) 18:56, 16 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment WP:CRYSTAL was not part of the original nomination, but it is part of the discussion. Both I and another user brought it up as possible reasons for deleting/redirecting. It, along with WP:TOOSOON needs to be addressed by editors arguing for keeping the article. TornadoLGS (talk) 18:26, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * ok, but CRYSTAL cannot be used by keepers as it was never part of the original nomination, so is an illegitimate justification. Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 18:35, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, we are not limited to discussing only the argument in the nomination in determining a consensus about whether an article should be kept at AfD. SportingFlyer  T · C  18:44, 16 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep How could this possibly be WP:TOOSOON? The 2019 page was made in 2013, redirected for a few years, and made into an article in NOVEMBER of 2018! The 2018 page was similar with the redirects and branched out into an article in November of the year before as well. Gatemansgc (TɅ̊LK) 23:13, 16 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Again WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Redirecting is fine, but otherwise those articles were started too soon as well. TornadoLGS (talk) 23:30, 16 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Per above. Anthony23066 (talk) 13:36, 17 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep It has been stated before that we make hurricane season articles once the first prediction is released. TSR just released theirs. HurricaneGonzalo &#124; Talk &#124; Contribs 17:52, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * But should we? Does starting an article based on a weather prediction violate WP:CRYSTAL? TornadoLGS (talk) 18:56, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * But it is also stated Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. HurricaneGonzalo &#124; Talk &#124; Contribs 20:05, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Is the TSR prediction almost certain to be correct? Yes, the names are already chosen, but that doesn't justify having this page any more than it does having an article for the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season. So they key issue is really the forecast. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:22, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I am afraid you have misread my comment, as I had seen coming. I am not saying that their prediction is certain. I am saying that the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season is an event that is certain to occur, and therefore does not violate WP:CRYSTAL. WP:OTHERSTUFF does not apply here either, in your argument. HurricaneGonzalo &#124; Talk &#124; Contribs 21:23, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * May I remind everybody that during the 2016 Atlantic hurricane season, the first system was on January 12th. This whole discussion about went to begin an article for a hurricane season is completely irrelevant: There will be a 2020 Atlantic hurricane season, it can begin anytime after December 31st, 2019 (which is two weeks away), and it is better be prepared for it than be caught with our pants down ! Pierre cb (talk) 23:06, 17 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep for now WP:RUSH Lightburst (talk) 02:35, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - per and  - unless Donald Trump, Sr. causes nuclear winter to avoid his impeachment and removal, scientific consensus is this will almost certainly happen in two to nine months' time. Bearian (talk) 20:59, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep I know this is basically a snow keep now, but I just wanted to add that I looked at the history of the 2017, 2018, and 2019 articles. All of them existed before this date and were never nominated for deletion. I am not trying to harsh on the nominator, but please keep in mind in periodic articles like this it is a good idea to look at the same articles in other periods and see when they were created and if they were nominated for deletion because of a too soon date. This is also a good way to determine if an article not yet in existence should be in existence for the next cycle. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:15, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Previous seasons have always been created in or around this time period. With that in mind and atleast one prediction out for the season, I see no real reason to wait all the way until April to create it. -Sdslayer100 (talk) 02:38, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect at least until the beginning of 2020. Not gonna change any minds at this point, but I don't think having a handful of numbers is a good enough reason to have an article even earlier than five months in advance of the official season. Master of Time   ( talk ) 09:13, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep on procedural grounds as the nomination statement does not advance any applicable arguments for deletion. I'd also firmly reject the suggestion of taking any action with the expectation of reverting it within two weeks' time. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 18:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. We are getting seasonal forecasts now and we know there will be a 2020 AHS. Even in the quietest years, storms do form. No crystal ball here. CrazyC83 (talk) 05:06, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Alright. While I'm still rather iffy on the idea of starting these articles on the basis of seasonal forecasts, I can see the writing on the wall. We might as well go ahead with a snowball keep. TornadoLGS (talk) 19:26, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep there's really no point in deleting/redirecting it now. Not really any policy-based reasons to not keep here. Happy Festivities! //  J 947  (c) 03:23, 21 December 2019 (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.