Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 Tangshan 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 no consensus. ‑Scottywong | [express] || 16:05, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

2020 Tangshan earthquake

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable event. This is an encyclopedia (not an earthquake catalog). Dawnseeker2000 08:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. — MarkH21talk 08:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. — MarkH21talk 08:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. — MarkH21talk 08:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. — MarkH21talk 08:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep or merge to 1976 Tangshan earthquake: I agree that Wikipedia is not a directory and shouldn’t include every minor earthquake. Even though this isn’t a major earthquake with casualties, this is a bit more than a minor earthquake.There is enough significant coverage from independent reliable sources for this earthquake to overwhelmingly pass WP:GNG. There's a lot of in-depth local and national coverage (e.g. Xinhua), but more importantly there is also substantial international coverage including: South China Morning Post (link), CNA (link), Associated Press (link), Fox News (link), Hindustan Times (link). The SCMP article, for instance, goes into more than just routine coverage and describes its structural damage, its geological and cultural link to the massive 1976 Tangshan earthquake, and its temporary effects on infrastructure.If one looks at WP:EVENTCRITERIA, this passes GNG by a mile, is more than just a routine event, and is also likely to continue to have a lasting effect not least due to the geological significance of the fault. — MarkH21talk 08:18, 24 September 2020 (UTC); added merge option per my follow-up comment 20:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * There is also follow-up coverage in August 2020: Xinhua. — MarkH21talk 05:01, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * By the way, if the article is not kept, merging this article to Aftermath of 1976 Tangshan earthquake is a viable alternative to deletion. Many of the articles describe this as geologically related to the 1976 earthquake. Its cultural significance is largely in its geographic coincidence with the 1976 earthquake. — MarkH21talk 04:56, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:53, 30 September 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep: I agree Wikipedia should not be a catalogue for earthquakes, but in this instance the earthquake is notable. It satisfies WP:GNG. RandomIntrigue (talk) 06:27, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete with the exception of the Xinhua article, basically everything is a regurgitation of the six-sentence AP report. As WP:EFFECT states, A minor earthquake or storm with little or no impact on human populations is probably not notable.  There is no continued coverage, just day-of coverage. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 04:33, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The SCMP article has 19 sentences, significantly more than a regurgitation of the six-sentence AP report. This article by Xinhua is continued coverage. — MarkH21talk 04:38, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete: WP:LASTING. This was a routine run of the mill event.   // Timothy ::  talk  12:51, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:23, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:NOTNEWS#2 so while many events may garner lots of news, that is something different than encyclopedic value. Geschichte (talk) 07:09, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, an earthquake in which people die is most certainly not a run-of-the-mill event. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:21, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The article itself says that there was no death or injury resulting from this minor earthquake which did not even cause major damage. StellarHalo (talk) 01:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Nothing notable about this particular quake that was a whole 5 with minor damage and no fatalities reported. Sources cited herein make only brief mentions. sixty nine   • whaddya want? •  18:03, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Selective Merge to 1976 Tangshan earthquake. A new section in that article can be started with the title "Later earthquakes" or "the 2020 earthquake" or something like that. I was going to vote to keep due to the coverage, but WP:NOTNEWS covers that. However, several of the sources are comparing the new earthquake to the 1976 earthquake. I therefore believe it can be selectively merged into a new section there. Footlessmouse (talk) 19:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment If not an outright delete, I like this suggestion. sixty nine   • whaddya want? •  06:48, 18 October 2020 (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.