Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T.J. Salts Lumber Mill Explosion: the story of the T.J. Salts Lumber Mill explosion of 1905 commonly referred to as “The Big Blowup”


 * 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 Draftify‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 23:43, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

T.J. Salts Lumber Mill Explosion: the story of the T.J. Salts Lumber Mill explosion of 1905 commonly referred to as “The Big Blowup”

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

Clearly not ready for mainspace but the creator has already moved it from draft to mainspace so we need consensus on what to do with it. I’m assuming the underlying events are notable but in addition to questions of format and style this looks like a large amount of original research. Mccapra (talk) 23:06, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 23:06, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The events are covered in a section of Del Rio, Tennessee written by the author of this article. That section probably needs checking for OR too. Phil Bridger (talk) 07:12, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Can we move it back to draft space? There does appear to be a large amount of original research here, and notability's difficult to gauge with the article's citation format - not that you can't cite things the way you want to, but there are links to newspapers.com searches and not specific articles. It's also possible it's a notable enough event for a stand-alone article, though, which makes it a difficult discussion. SportingFlyer  T · C  15:58, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify: Topic may be notable, but the article is not encyclopedic. Fancy Refrigerator (talk) 22:24, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree sending to draft is appropriate for now until further work can be done on it.Mccapra (talk) 22:44, 6 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Draftify: It's potentially notable and could be a good article but it's not currently in Wikipedia format, in terms of citations, wikilinks, formatting, even the title doesn't meet style guidance. Tidy up and then we can judge the notability. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:09, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify: while the topic seems notable (they wrote about it at the time, yes?) the way this article exists right now really does not seem suitable for Wikipedia. The citations are URL links, it's written like an essay, the title itself is extremely verbose... but AfD is not cleanup, so this should be worked on and improved. jp×g 03:16, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify per above. The person who loves reading (talk) 21:49, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify written like an essay/analysis of the text, needs rewriting to comply with wp:mos Karnataka (talk) 19:35, 12 June 2023 (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.