Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 Central Idaho earthquake

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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. Consensus is clear, and coverage is clearly sufficient to meet the GNG. BD2412 T 21:36, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2020 Central Idaho earthquake

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

2020 Central Idaho earthquake (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Events with no impact on people, places and things don't really have encyclopedic value. That this event happened, I say "so what". Dawnseeker2000 18:44, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Idiotic nomination to say the least. 10 editors have edited the page in last 3 weeks since it was created, not counting IPs and nary a complaint amongst them. Largest earthquake to hit Idaho since 1983 and it DID impact a few structures albeit minimally.--MONGO (talk) 18:54, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is so far the most powerful earthquake to hit the 48 states in 2020.[1]--MONGO (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Idaho-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:55, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:56, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Snow close - this is an obvious Keep - WaPo stated: And while thousands were caught off guard, bewildered by the out-of-the-blue earthquake, some scientists — such as Glenn Thackray, a geoscientist at Idaho State University — had already encouraged people near the epicenter to prepare for an earthquake a decade ago. The fact that it was predicted in advance speaks volumes. It's no longer WP:Crystal Ball - it happened and scientists saw it coming. These are important things our readers need to know. Atsme Talk 📧 19:00, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Atsme: – The discussion so far does not show that the deletion request should culminate in a snow close. Just to reiterate, the text that you posted from the Washington Post does not make anything obvious. I have stated this before. The West Coast of the US is vulnerable to earthquakes. That this happened is unsurprising and unencyclopedic. Dawnseeker2000 23:21, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
'Reply – Yeah, I agree that readers should (already) know that the West Coast of the United States is prone to earthquakes, but I think that we have other articles that state that already. I don't think that this article would be the place they would be looking to find that information anyway. It's a non-event, so in a year's time say, people will have forgotten about it and there's no way in h*** people are going to be searching for that type of information on this type of article, if it's kept. Dawnseeker2000 20:02, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Given the kind to reporting that followed the earthquake - Supervolcano! Yikes!! Boom!!!, it seems to me that this kind of just-the-facts, non-sensational context in the encyclopedia stating what actually happened and happens is what we're here to provide. Acroterion (talk) 20:12, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:CRYSTAL as we have no idea yet what folks might look for.--MONGO (talk) 20:26, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Acroterion: – The only facts to disclose have already been made public by the news outlets. That's what they do for the clicks ($). There aren't really any facts to write about with this event, and if you really want non-sensationalism, no article will do that better than any article at all. Dawnseeker2000 23:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is pretty much an "if a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound" nomination. It's the second largest earthquake to have been recorded in Idaho, and the fifth largest in a region noted for seismic activity. I understand the notability guidelines, and they aren't meant to create a narrow focus on whether it hurt humans or their products. I'll leave aside the nonsense that always appears about whether this is a sign that Yellowstone will erupt, but given the sensitivity of hydrothermal systems in the area to seismic events, I suspect we will see some research arise from this event, in the same manner that the Borah Peak earthquake stimulated study. In the Aleutians this kind of thing happens all the time, not Idaho. A good, dispassionate summary of the event is here [2], which notes, as one expects, that this kind of extensional earthquake has no impact or connection to the Yellowstone volcano, but some effects on hydrothermal systems are expected. With nobody much in the park to do the research, we should not expect on-the-spot reporting. Acroterion (talk) 19:32, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This earthquake fails WP:EVENT, which is the appropriate guideline. There is no evidence of any lasting impact, no injuries and virtually no damage. The news coverage pretty much dried up a week after the 'quake, so little evidence that WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE is met. Whatever the news sources say, Glenn Thackray did not "predict" this earthquake, he "forecast" that an earthquake in that general area was likely to happen and advised people to be prepared after he found evidence of an active fault in the area (although not the one that ruptured as it turns out). The number of editors that work on a page has no impact on notability. Presumably you missed my question about notability on the talk page? Mikenorton (talk) 19:40, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Mikenorton: – Right, so let's go through WP:EVENT with a little more focus. I'm not that familiar with this guideline, but I'll just go through some of the main points one-by-one and see how they apply.
Criteria How it applies here
Lasting effects None
Geographical scope Limited (only two people used the USGS Did You Feel It? system to report an intensity of VII, but don't forget that we cannot use that figure (WP:USERGENERATED)
Depth of coverage Pretty lacking. The local and national news outlets reported on this event because they're selling news. In the future, if this event winds up having a dedicated journal article, that won't mean anything because the content in the article will be stuff we're not looking for
Duration of coverage Nothing happened so there's no need for the news stations to keep jibber jabbering about it
Diversity of sources I wouldn't call TV stations, newspapers and the like "diverse"
Sensationalism If we want to avoid sensationalism, we can do that best by not having an article
Don't rush to create articles This, by far, is WP:Earthquake's toughest problem to overcome. It is essentially why I'm typing this. There may not be a solution, but I intend to keep thinking about it and bringing these insufficient items to AFD
Wikinews These types of events are a perfect match for Wikinews. They have snippets. There is not enough there for an encyclopedia article, and to pretend that there is just seems a little desperate
Dawnseeker2000 23:40, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete The only sources are routine reports that are done for every tremor in the country, no matter how small, and some local coverage of pretty minor damage. Even if it ends up being the strongest quake in the country at the end of the year (which is more than eight months off), my guess is that the strongest quake in most years is pretty puny and isn't significantly reported except maybe in an end-of-year list. So I'm just not seeing the notability. Mangoe (talk) 20:20, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Per suggestion below, I'm going to go with redirect to List of earthquakes in 2020. Since we are recording everything in a list where everything in the article now is already recorded, I still don't see a reason to have a separate article but deletion no longer seems the right approach. Mangoe (talk) 14:03, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As per WP:EVENT As per the guideline, the event should be "worthy of notice"; that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded", and as mentioned previously, this is the largest earthquake in the mainland US in 2020 which I think should fit that criteria; articles like this further confirm my suspicion. Zoozaz1 (talk) 20:26, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Zoozaz1: – Worthy of notice? Yeah, if you're a news outlet trying to make money. That's not what we do here, and WP:Earthquakes prefers not to have these types of articles. They reek of desperation. In our eyes, it's insignificant because there was no damage, injuries, or deaths. There won't be any lasting impact. Laws won't change. Idahoan's are simply reminded that they live in earthquake country. Dawnseeker2000 23:50, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete Having read the page I endorse the observations of deleting nominator. Otherwise, it will be a precedent after such an incident elsewhere. Nannadeem (talk) 21:12, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I don't understand the nomination. This was a notable earthquake for where it was and when it was and how large it was. Nominator makes no mention of policy reasons to delete. As mentioned up above, it might be boring, but this earthquake will be discussed or years in "Idaho in 2020" and that is what this encyclopedia is about. Sir Joseph (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Sir Joseph: – Who will be discussing this event for years, please? I'm sure it won't be me or any of the WP:Earthquake regulars. Dawnseeker2000 23:52, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - It's a magnitude 6.5, so not some time earthquake. It's difficult to assess lasting coverage this close to the nomination. If in 8-12 months there's no continued coverage, then the judgment that this isn't notable can be made. The earthquake was big enough to get the benefit of the doubt until it becomes obvious that lasting coverage won't occur. Hog Farm (talk) 21:42, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hog Farm: – What in the world does magnitude have to do with notability? Aren't there other aspects of earthquakes that could better contribute to notability? How about intensity? For the most part, it appears that most folks reported feeling this moderately. What about type? Or displacement? Or recurrence interval? Dawnseeker2000 23:58, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Notability will be determined by WP:NEVENT. It's too close to the event to determine whether lasting coverage will be met or not. The earthquake is large enough that I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt to determine if it'll get that coverage or not. That's a bit subjective and not necessary by-the-book reasoning, but see WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY. Also see WP:BLUDGEON, about 10 replies in one AfD is probably getting to the boundary there. Hog Farm (talk) 00:26, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, I started this AfD and I did not include any reasoning in the initial entry, so that's what I'm doing now. Dawnseeker2000 00:35, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete - it receives routine coverage but nothing groundbreaking. a 6.5 earthquake in general isn't uncommon. it remains to be seen just how important the event really is = "unless something further gives them additional enduring significance."Grmike (talk) 22:08, 19 April 2020 (UTC)grmike[reply]
  • keep this was the largest earthquake in the state since 1983, and I believe that the information should be readily available to people interested in seismology. As the person that put together most of this article, I feel like it is a good resource and deleting it will be like deleting an event in history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100E:B12C:1098:CD5E:4590:EEBB:2ED2 (talk)
If the decision is to delete this article, it can be redirected to List of earthquakes in 2020, which already contains most of the information - nothing will be lost. Mikenorton (talk) 09:26, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@2600:100E:B12C:1098:CD5E:4590:EEBB:2ED2: – 1983 was just about 40 years ago. You know that's nothing in geological time, right? It doesn't matter. Only news stations report that kind of material; not encyclopedias. Dawnseeker2000 00:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Notable earthquake that generated significant coverage in reliable sources. Not a local or insignificant. This wasn't a routine earthquake in an area known for earthquakes, it was an earthquake in an area not know for earthquakes where they would be and are a significant concern, whence the coverage. ConstantPlancks (talk) 02:52, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ConstantPlancks: – Idaho has had large and very large earthquakes for millions of years. It's quite mountainous there. Dawnseeker2000 00:04, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Bearian: I have experienced a number of large earthquakes and that has fueled my interest, so I would consider that I'm able to speak the lingo, but definitely not an expert. Just think about this in terms of time. It's really an ephemeral event. If there was a cracked road, that will be repaired relatively quickly and then that will be it. Scientists will certainly be interested, but that does not necessarily mean that we would want or need to write something on it. Dawnseeker2000 00:11, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Second largest earthquake in Idaho, there was damage albeit minor, got coverage even after it happened, was a "very strong" intensity, and 6.5 is nothing to sneeze at especially for how shallow depth it was at. All that together, in my view, makes it notable. PackMecEng (talk) 02:59, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@PackMecEng: – No, there have been much larger earthquakes in that area. Earthquakes are mountain builders, and Idaho has no shortage of mountainous terrain. The slip vector on this one was lateral, so it did not contribute in that respect. How does magnitude relate to notability anyway? Dawnseeker2000 00:16, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dawnseeker2000: Sources say second largest, so it's second largest. Magnitude is part of notability for earthquakes. Not the only part but certainly a part per WP:NEARTHQUAKE. Question are you going to question everyone here? PackMecEng (talk) 00:20, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think had it killed many people and destroyed Boise there would be no argument. One wonders what the mission of the Earthquakes Wikiproject is, if it is not an effort to compile a compendium of all quakes and provide a standalone for the largest quake in a region in nearly 40 years. One would think that the geological information (albeit that is scanty now due to the weather and the sheltering in place issues) would be interesting enough due to the magnitude that it deserves more than a snippet in a list. Call me an inclusionist.--MONGO (talk) 00:04, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2020_Central_Idaho_earthquake&oldid=1068980272"