Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States weather of 2007
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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.
desat 03:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
United States weather of 2007
- United States weather of 2007 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
The primary reason for this nomination is that the articles are not notable. Weather happens; that fact is amply covered in articles like
Late-March 2007 Tornado Outbreak or 2007 Western North American heat wave (themselves of dubious encyclopedic calibre, but anyway). Second, the entries are necessarily subjective (mostly unreferenced too). For instance, ME, VT, NH, CT, RI, AK, HI, NM and OR are mentioned not at all in the 2007 article, while observations like "May was dry and an unseasonably warm" are presumably rather more mundane than the entirety of 2007 weather in those 9 states. Third and most troublingly, these two articles pose a dangerous slippery slope. Are we now committed to writing articles on every year in US weather from now on? Can we expect Czechoslovak weather of 1927, Angolan weather of 1982, Egyptian weather of 1564 BC and Imperial Roman weather of 37 AD coming down the pipeline eventually? I hope not, and I hope we can put a rightful stop to this misguided endeavour. Biruitorul 00:00, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
I am also nominating the following related page because the same arguments apply:
- United States weather of 2006 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Comment I have to say that I don't see a problem with the idea for such an article but rather with the fact that it lacks sources. I agree with your example about articles about weather from all ages, however if some people are willing to devote their time to create such articles they can go ahead I suppose. Who knows, maybe it can become a source for a researcher fifty years from now :) If the concensus is delete, count me as delete though - the article is on shaky ground. Baristarim 06:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete For dramatic weather changes or events listed in the article, it seems redundant to other articles like 2007 Western North American heat wave. For less dramatic event, they are not notable in any way. Some observations may even constitute OR. At any rate, the content here is not suitable to include in an encyclopedia. Period. t 06:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Revision I agree with the arguments of redundancy and lack of notability; however, it seems like an article with a heading such as this would be an excellent place to link to the pre-existing articles on notable weather events within the given year, as well as a place to have some (cited) observations as to the general trends indicated by such notable events. More of a cross-reference index than a stand-alone article. Ncalvin 22:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment is there a WikiAlmanac to transwiki this to? 132.205.99.122 20:30, 5 November 2007 (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.