- 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. Another article nominated soon after its creation. I don't want to be a broken record so look at other AFDs from 2/22 for my remarks. A clear consensus to Keep and discussions about a Merge or Rename can occur on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
2024 Guangzhou bridge collapse
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- 2024 Guangzhou bridge collapse ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:LASTING, WP:NOTNEWS 5 dead is not significant, article creator has created many other such articles that fail these Cutlass Ciera 02:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- five is not major but under the circumstances of how the bridge collapsed is notable
Dubstar44 (
talk)
02:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- the way the bridge collapsed and how it collapsed is notable as its not every day a boat smashes into a bridge causing a large portion to collapse articles like this are not always needed for death tolls but how it happened and such as the boat crashing into the bridge
Dubstar44 (
talk)
02:54, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- "the way the bridge collapsed and how it collapsed is notable", is not a criterion for notability. LibStar ( talk) 14:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- the way the bridge collapsed and how it collapsed is notable as its not every day a boat smashes into a bridge causing a large portion to collapse articles like this are not always needed for death tolls but how it happened and such as the boat crashing into the bridge
Dubstar44 (
talk)
02:54, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, bridge collapses are rare and this one made the international news. WP:NOT#NEWS is designed to prevent tabloid-style "journalism", such as celebrity gossip. Abductive ( reasoning) 02:55, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. An event being in the news does not make it notable. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 04:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Merge/Redirect to List of bridge failures. The bridge itself does not appear to be notable. I think a redirect is fine as the article can always be recreated if more detail comes out. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 05:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- @ Knowledgekid87: I actually think the bridge itself is notable. See also for instance the Chinese article including the history. So, I'm interested to know why you think the bridge itself is not notable? 82.174.61.58 ( talk) 14:57, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep or otherwise rename into Lixinsha Bridge: I expanded the article and there is more information available in other sources. There is also more information about the history of the bridge (see also the Chinese article of the bridge and Chinese article of the 2024 accident). 82.174.61.58 ( talk) 13:18, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep or Rename as and adjust to make article about Lixinsha Bridge - Bridge collapses are notable enough. there are much less serious incidents with articles at List of bridge failures
- Merge into List of bridge failures; this event is serious enough to warrant inclusion (as that list includes a number of non-fatal collapses, plus several collapses with more fatalities than this one), but I question whether there is enough material for more than a stub article. -- Delta1989 ( talk) ( contributions) 03:57, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep for now per WP:RAPID. It's literally just been 1 day after this event when the article is nominated. Managed to get to numerous international news outlets [1] [2] [3] [4] so there is enough coverage to pass the simple WP:GNG. I'd imagine that the last paragraph at WP:LASTING applies here too. I would not be opposed to a merger should notability be not there after a few months. S5A-0043 Talk 05:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep for now and rename Lixinsha Bridge. It notable per WP:EVENT and has WP:COVERAGE as it has international coverage with CNN and NYT, also it may meet WP:LASTING if the claim "Due to low safety standards and poor enforcement, building fires and similar deadly incidents are common in China” found in Yingcai Boarding School fire has a reliable source (the source [5] does verify this) and applies to this bridge too. Whether it’s WP:LASTING for a bridge, I’m unsure. But keeping the current encyclopedic summary of the bridge collapse in a Wiki article about the Lixinsha Bridge sounds good. waddie96 ★ ( talk) 11:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Meets WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 11:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Snowball Keep. Meets WP:GNG, who knows if it's going to meet WP:LASTING. Example of WP:RAPID. Acebulf ( talk | contribs) 00:10, 29 February 2024 (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.
- 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. Another article nominated soon after its creation. I don't want to be a broken record so look at other AFDs from 2/22 for my remarks. A clear consensus to Keep and discussions about a Merge or Rename can occur on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
2024 Guangzhou bridge collapse
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- 2024 Guangzhou bridge collapse ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:LASTING, WP:NOTNEWS 5 dead is not significant, article creator has created many other such articles that fail these Cutlass Ciera 02:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- five is not major but under the circumstances of how the bridge collapsed is notable
Dubstar44 (
talk)
02:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- the way the bridge collapsed and how it collapsed is notable as its not every day a boat smashes into a bridge causing a large portion to collapse articles like this are not always needed for death tolls but how it happened and such as the boat crashing into the bridge
Dubstar44 (
talk)
02:54, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- "the way the bridge collapsed and how it collapsed is notable", is not a criterion for notability. LibStar ( talk) 14:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- the way the bridge collapsed and how it collapsed is notable as its not every day a boat smashes into a bridge causing a large portion to collapse articles like this are not always needed for death tolls but how it happened and such as the boat crashing into the bridge
Dubstar44 (
talk)
02:54, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, bridge collapses are rare and this one made the international news. WP:NOT#NEWS is designed to prevent tabloid-style "journalism", such as celebrity gossip. Abductive ( reasoning) 02:55, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. An event being in the news does not make it notable. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 04:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Merge/Redirect to List of bridge failures. The bridge itself does not appear to be notable. I think a redirect is fine as the article can always be recreated if more detail comes out. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 05:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- @ Knowledgekid87: I actually think the bridge itself is notable. See also for instance the Chinese article including the history. So, I'm interested to know why you think the bridge itself is not notable? 82.174.61.58 ( talk) 14:57, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep or otherwise rename into Lixinsha Bridge: I expanded the article and there is more information available in other sources. There is also more information about the history of the bridge (see also the Chinese article of the bridge and Chinese article of the 2024 accident). 82.174.61.58 ( talk) 13:18, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep or Rename as and adjust to make article about Lixinsha Bridge - Bridge collapses are notable enough. there are much less serious incidents with articles at List of bridge failures
- Merge into List of bridge failures; this event is serious enough to warrant inclusion (as that list includes a number of non-fatal collapses, plus several collapses with more fatalities than this one), but I question whether there is enough material for more than a stub article. -- Delta1989 ( talk) ( contributions) 03:57, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep for now per WP:RAPID. It's literally just been 1 day after this event when the article is nominated. Managed to get to numerous international news outlets [1] [2] [3] [4] so there is enough coverage to pass the simple WP:GNG. I'd imagine that the last paragraph at WP:LASTING applies here too. I would not be opposed to a merger should notability be not there after a few months. S5A-0043 Talk 05:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep for now and rename Lixinsha Bridge. It notable per WP:EVENT and has WP:COVERAGE as it has international coverage with CNN and NYT, also it may meet WP:LASTING if the claim "Due to low safety standards and poor enforcement, building fires and similar deadly incidents are common in China” found in Yingcai Boarding School fire has a reliable source (the source [5] does verify this) and applies to this bridge too. Whether it’s WP:LASTING for a bridge, I’m unsure. But keeping the current encyclopedic summary of the bridge collapse in a Wiki article about the Lixinsha Bridge sounds good. waddie96 ★ ( talk) 11:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Meets WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 11:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Snowball Keep. Meets WP:GNG, who knows if it's going to meet WP:LASTING. Example of WP:RAPID. Acebulf ( talk | contribs) 00:10, 29 February 2024 (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.