Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 Ferndale earthquake

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 delete. Cerebellum (talk) 22:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Ferndale earthquake

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is not a notable event by any stretch of the imagination. Why was this created? Dawnseeker2000 16:46, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I created the article and would like to make a case that for large seismic events by magnitude like this one, with extensive coverage in reliable secondary sources, the corresponding article (and Wikidata item) should be created in order to serve the needs of people looking for this information. The Mercalli intensity of the earthquake was moderate but by magnitude, this is one of the largest to have hit California in the past 5 years. It was covered in The Guardian, CNN, The Independent, Fox News, ABC News, just to name a few. The earthquake is in the list of the most significant seismic events worldwide in the past month according to USGS. The earthquake is only one in 7 events with a magnitude equal to, or greater than 6.5 to hit North America in the past 10 years. I'll continue to expand the stub with more information. --DarTar (talk) 16:54, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is "extensive" coverage because news organizations' primary goal is to make money. There is no reason to document low intensity earthquakes with zero effects, either in stand alone articles or lists, especially in a very seismically active area like the north coast of California. Look at the contradictory headlines versus what is in the text of these articles:

"Powerful magnitude 6.5 earthquake hits" ("There were no immediate reports of injuries or damage") – Los Angeles Times
California earthquake latest: 6.5 magnitude tremor recorded off West Coast 'That was a big one,' San Francisco resident says (No damages, injuries or tsunami threat reported from earthquake that struck Thursday) – The Guardian

Dawnseeker2000 17:07, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS Seasider91 (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Earthquakes/notability_guidelines, which is a reasonable set of criteria that this earthquake fails. Recent news report should not be granted a ton of credit, per WP:NOTNEWS. (Ping Lugnuts, who did this edit, maybe they can point to a discussion behind it?) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 17:38, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there was one, but it was a good move to place that template there. Some tsunami earthquakes are low intensity events, and are a good example of an exception. Dawnseeker2000 17:50, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:05, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:05, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:36, 13 December 2016 (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.