Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big bay boom


 * 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 and Rename to Big Bay Boom. IronGargoyle (talk) 14:54, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Big Bay Boom incident

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Per WP:NOTNEWS. This is just a single event with no lasting impact. Basa lisk inspect damage⁄berate 13:25, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Amounts to "San Diego had a lot of fireworks yesterday." --BDD (talk) 15:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC) (edit: with recent additions, this comment looks a bit off base, so consider this a "per nom" vote --BDD (talk) 16:58, 5 July 2012 (UTC))
 * Delete unless follow-up news reports tell us something of lasting importance. Borock (talk) 17:55, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 13:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 13:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 13:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete (Changing to "redirect/merge", see below) (Changing to Keep and rename to Big Bay Boom, see below) Hey, I was there and I saw it, and I will never forget it - but that does not make it into an incident of lasting significance to the world. News coverage was a one-day thing. --MelanieN (talk) 16:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * P.S. The coverage, though brief, was nationwide. I just rewrote the article for clarity and sourcing. It's probably going to be deleted, but in the meantime it might as well tell the story clearly. --MelanieN (talk) 17:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:GEOSCOPE (i.e. only affects/affected San Diego); no lasting effects WP:EFFECT, no persistence WP:PERSISTENCE. Roodog2k (talk) 17:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, subject falls under WP:1E, and at this point it does not appear, at this time, to pass WP:EFFECT. If there were an article regarding the company which was responsible for the show, Garden State Fireworks, than I would propose that verified content be merged there; however, as that is not the case, the only possible solution is deletion.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That's an interesting idea, RCLC. I'd like to ask that this article not be snow-deleted; please leave it up for the full week, to give me time to see if I can create an appropriate target for a merge/redirect. I think the company may be notable enough for an article. BTW, the reference WP:1E refers to PEOPLE not being notable for a single event, not to the events themselves. Obviously we don't delete articles about events just for being about events; we have lots of such articles (see, for example, Category:Aviation accidents and incidents). We delete articles about events if they do not have lasting significance (i.e. WP:NOTNEWS), which is almost certainly going to be the case here. (But hey, it was AWESOME!) --MelanieN (talk) 20:53, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Due to the creation of the article Garden State Fireworks, I shall change my vote to Merge & Redirect, as the event (although it is getting more coverage) does not presently pass WP:EFFECT (even though if coverage continues at its present pace it may eventually pass EFFECT) it does not then reach criteria set forth in WP:EVENT. That being said, as Garden State Fireworks has been created, it can then be merged into that article, and a redirect be left in its place. If it can be later found that the subject does pass EFFECT than the content can always be spunout.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 10:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge/Redirect to Garden State Fireworks. (Changing to keep and rename to Big Bay Boom, see below - sorry for all the changes of opinion!) The company turned out to be notable IMO so I created the article. Content about this incident is already merged into that article. Check it out! --MelanieN (talk) 01:21, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Move/Rename to Big Bay Boom and expand. Apparently, this event has been going on for more than a decade, not a new event. It should then be expanded so as not to give undue weight to the accident, which is one incident in a long history.--Auric (talk) 12:47, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm from San Diego and I watch the Big Bay Boom every year - but even I don't think it's notable enough for an article of its own. I'm willing to be persuaded by sources, but I suspect most of the sources you find will just be event announcements - "the Big Bay Boom will take place at 9 PM on July 4, here's where you can watch it from" - rather than in-depth coverage. --MelanieN (talk) 01:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC) Changing my mind, I think Big Bay Boom may deserve an article after all; see below. --MelanieN (talk) 04:23, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * neutral/preserve somehow Personally, I don't agree with a merge/redirect to Garden State Fireworks, but I would agree with a merge/redirect with Big bay boom or something related to San Diego... assuming it's notable.  I have a weird reasoning with this, related to geoscope.  This event is really more closely associated with San Diego, and I feel that this information should be preserved vis-a-vis in a San Diego-related article, not the firework company.  I don't think this can stand on it's own as an article, but in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE, this information should be kept in an article about San Diego where someone could read about it who would otherwise not know about it. Roodog2k (talk) 14:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * But is it Wikipedia's job to keep a record of every incident that ever happened? Borock (talk) 15:17, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I never said Wikipedia should keep a record of every incident that ever happened. Respectfully, you just used a logical fallacy.  See also Straw man.  Again, respectfully, looking past the rhetoric, and my lack of language skills to clearly communicate my feelings, I propose the following:  It appears that a concensus is developing to keep this as a merge/redirect, which I disagree with.  The implication is that it's a sufficiently notable event to record.  I agree that it's notable enough to preserve the information someplace in Wikipedia, but without the merge/redirect.  I would accept a redirect to Big bay boom if the event were deemed notable, but I do not deem that event notable myself, and that seems consistent with concensus.  A sentence or two in some article someplace is fine.  This is the reasoning behind my changed vote.  Should the need arise, I shall be bold and fix it myself.Roodog2k (talk) 19:40, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete This was a one time event that garnered some media attention immediately after, but would be very arguable to have any lasting signifigance outside of the standard "interesting news item of the day" type news stories.  Per Wiki's policy on Notability (events), events need to have lasting signifigance, which I don't see here.  The relevent information has already been merged into the much more notable Garden State Fireworks article, so there is no need to include this as a separate page.  Rorshacma (talk) 20:10, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep and Rename - After some research I have come to think Auric and Roodog are correct after all; the Big Bay Boom may be notable enough for its own article. The annual event is "one of the most logistically complex displays in the world," spanning 14 miles over five locations. I am now inclined to say Keep this article and Rename it to "Big Bay Boom," and rewrite it to be about the annual event - with just a section about the incident. I will undertake the rewriting if it is kept. --MelanieN (talk) 04:23, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * BTW I have updated the article with more recent information. The video of this incident was the most-viewed video on YouTube that week, seen by 4 million viewers. I know, that doesn't make it notable - but still it shows the impact. --MelanieN (talk) 04:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:44, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep totally notable.LuciferWildCat (talk) 21:49, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:ITSNOTABLE. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:22, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as a flash in the pan. Mangoe (talk) 13:05, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment to closing administrator: if the result here is delete, please userfy it to me; I would like to rework it into an article about the event itself (the Big Bay Boom) and resubmit it. --MelanieN (talk) 14:54, 20 July 2012 (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.