The result was no consensus. After two weeks of listing, there is no consensus that the weather event is "routine news". Delete !voters validly point to the frequency of such events; keep !voters validly point to the depth of news coverage and severity and impact of the weather. WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT are always difficult policies and guidelines to apply, especially during or just after the event concerned. In this AfD, there is nowhere near a consensus that NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT should be applied in such a way as to delete this article. This is the kind of AfD that could be re-visited a few months down the track when the questions of enduring notability and impact can be better answered. Mkativerata ( talk) 05:18, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Title says it all; clearly a page on a minor weather event. Violates the WP:NOT#NEWS Policy and the WP:Notability (events) guideline. Deprodded. Abductive ( reasoning) 16:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. After two weeks of listing, there is no consensus that the weather event is "routine news". Delete !voters validly point to the frequency of such events; keep !voters validly point to the depth of news coverage and severity and impact of the weather. WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT are always difficult policies and guidelines to apply, especially during or just after the event concerned. In this AfD, there is nowhere near a consensus that NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT should be applied in such a way as to delete this article. This is the kind of AfD that could be re-visited a few months down the track when the questions of enduring notability and impact can be better answered. Mkativerata ( talk) 05:18, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Title says it all; clearly a page on a minor weather event. Violates the WP:NOT#NEWS Policy and the WP:Notability (events) guideline. Deprodded. Abductive ( reasoning) 16:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC) reply