Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hawaii missile alert


 * 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 speedy keep. SNOW close as keep, there is a strong consensus that the article is relevant. Merging it to somewhere else is an option but this is not something we discuss at AfD. Tone 22:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Hawaii missile alert

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is not a significant event - similar events have already been covered, as well as this one, on Emergency Alert System. Jayden (talk) 20:26, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose: This was an alert sent to every smartphone and television set in a U.S. state saying a ballistic missile was about to hit them during a time of heightened tensions between the U.S. and a neighboring nuclear power. I can't remember another incident of this scale in my lifetime. Certainly not in the age of smartphones and social media. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:28, 13 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge to Emergency Alert System. Fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. Long term significance is unimaginable. See also WP:RECENTISM and WP:10YT. Just because something gets some short term news coverage, even broad coverage, doesn't mean it belongs in an encyclopedia. To the extent this justifies a mention it can be done in the older article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I find the "just wait and see" advise in WP:10YT compelling myself. Let's not rush to delete this simply because this event happened a couple hours ago and its place in history has yet to be established. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * While it does have an impact for the state of Hawaii, it doesn't do anything for the rest of the world. If it was a hack or something similar, I can understand further developments down the line that might be worth covering on its own article. However, Hawaii officials have already confirmed that it was them who accidentally sent the alert, therefore making it just another incident involving the EAS and U.S. officials. Jayden (talk) 20:41, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * That's a dubious explanation, considering The Mercury News just had a report less than a month ago on how agencies in California could model their emergency preparedness for a missile strike off what Hawaii is doing. The explanations for how this happened are also not entirely clear at this time. What's more, I think the impact on a political jurisdiction of more than a million people justifies having a single article on Wikipedia. If this were an emergency alert sent out only to residents of Lincoln, Nebraska, sure, but this was an entire U.S. state that has been under credible threat of a first strike in recent months. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:44, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * From WP:EVENT...Routine kinds of news events (including most crimes, accidents, deaths, celebrity or political news, "shock" news, stories lacking lasting value such as "water cooler stories," and viral phenomena) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance. This is a gross failure of NOTNEWS and yet another example of the persistent mad rush to create articles with dubious claims to encyclopedic notability. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:47, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Also from WP:EVENT: "Events are also very likely to be notable if they have widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources, especially if also re-analyzed afterwards (as described below)." I suggest we follow the advice in WP:10YT and "wait and see" what comes of this. Deleting the article now would be premature. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:52, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Just to explicate Kudzu1's earlier point, I'd like to quote a hawaiian resident's comment on one of the earliest news stories I could find:
 * "Fifteen minutes ago my mom (she lives in Hawaii) sent the following in group text to me and my sisters: "Pray for us. Inbound missile. Civil defense sirens going off". My sisters and I all live on the US mainland. Shortly after I found news that the alert was a mistake, but fuck, man. Nothing quite like thinking your mother is seconds away from dying, and there's nothing you can do. My heart is still pounding." /quote LaceyUF (talk) 21:48, 13 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose This event clearly meets the criteria for standalone inclusion. The argument to merge into another article severely diminishes its real-world significance. LaceyUF (talk) 20:55, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * What real world significance? This is a water cooler news story. A little shocking. But with no enduring significance. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:02, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * "A little shocking"? That's not how it felt in Hawaii. -Kudzu1 (talk) 21:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ad Orientem is trying to manipulate the debate by downplaying the event. His language is very telling to anyone with Afd experience. LaceyUF (talk) 21:40, 13 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose outright deletion. It took 38 minutes to retract the warning so for 38 minutes anyone with a TV or phone in Hawaii thought a missile was inbound during a time of tension with a country (North Korea) that has threatened to strike the US with missiles, certainly a terrifying experience for hundreds of thousands of people in an entire US state, not just one city or small area. There also seems to be extensive coverage of this false alarm and heads might roll at Hawaii's EMA, leading to more coverage. If this dies down with little coverage in the future, a merge might be warranted, but this shouldn't just go away.331dot (talk) 21:06, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The odds this doesn't end up as an issue in Hawaii's gubernatorial election this year, if nothing else, seem pretty remote. -Kudzu1 (talk) 21:25, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to either the emergency alert noted above article or 2017–18 North Korea crisis. I see no need to scrub any mention of the event from Wikipedia, but I don't see this event having the depth of coverage over time necessary to support a stand alone article. Judicious editing can keep all of the information here as a reasonable sized section in another article.-- Jayron 32 21:16, 13 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Even if this should be considered as a part of 2017–18 North Korea crisis (I am not sure), it would be best to have as an independent sub-page based on the coverage. My very best wishes (talk) 21:40, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - situation impacted both people on the island and the world. The news spread all over the world within minutes. The article is comprehensive and references well. This passes WP:GNG. The nominator is wrong about this being a non-notable event.BabbaQ (talk) 22:00, 13 January 2018 (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.