Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Lochem bridge collapse


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. I see a clear consensus to Keep this article with a possible Merge discussion in the future. And, again, it's impossible to evaluate LASTING after one day. Please do not be in a rush to nominate articles unless there are serious problems and a more compelling deletion rationale demonstrating BEFORE might have influenced this outcome. Liz Read! Talk! 02:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

2024 Lochem bridge collapse

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:LASTING, 2 dead is not significant Cutlass Ciera  02:18, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation,  and Netherlands.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  02:52, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep, bridge collapses are rare and this one made the international news. WP:NOT is designed to prevent tabloid-style "journalism", such as celebrity gossip. Abductive  (reasoning) 02:56, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. An event being in the news does not make it notable. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 04:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Move and repurpose to Nettelhorster Bridge. The bridge itself and its plans to be may be notable, and the collapse can be integrated into that article. DarmaniLink (talk) 05:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep for now or rename into Nettelhorsterbrug and don’t hurry to delete. It’s a recurring topic in all the Dutch national news sources. It’s highly likely the event will have a long aftermath. As its seem as a main disaster in the Netherlands, it’s likely to fulfill WP:EVENT. 82.174.61.58 (talk) 07:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep and/or potentially integrate into article about the bridge. Nom cites WP:LASTING which actually states that "It may take weeks or months to determine whether or not an event has a lasting effect. This does not, however, mean recent events with unproven lasting effect are automatically non-notable." AusLondonder (talk) 18:35, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep as likely LASTING and rename/rework through a separate procedure. This nomination is focused on the references instead of on the sources in defiance of NEXIST. gidonb (talk) 09:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets WP:GNG and WP:LASTING. waddie96 ★ (talk) 11:59, 27 February 2024 (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.