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. The consensus here is clearly a Keep among all editors, not just those who focus on weather articles, mostly because of the damage it caused in Portugal. If you believe that this article should be renamed as something other than "a hurricane", well, that discussion can occur on the article talk page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:45, 9 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Hurricane Danielle (2022)

Hurricane Danielle (2022) (  | 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)

This has been discussed more than once over at Talk:2022 Atlantic hurricane season#Hurricane Danielle (revisited). Hurricanes in general receive WP:ROUTINE coverage when it comes to their Meteorological history. This storm in particular caused no deaths, no significant damage is known to have occurred, and no records were broken. WP:NOPAGE applies here as the information about impacts can easily fit into the main article. Additionally, it also fails Wikipedia's WP:GNG, and those at the Tropical cyclone Wikiproject. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 16:57, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Portugal, and Spain. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:25, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Redirect Per above. 100.12.169.218 ( talk) 21:30, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Merge into 2022 Atlantic hurricane season. This has substantial content but not enough to be its own article, and this information would best be repurposed as part of the larger season's article. InvadingInvader ( userpage, talk) 22:44, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Merge into 2022 Atlantic hurricane season clearly WP:ROUTINE, WP:NOTNEWS. HurricaneEdgar 00:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Merge into 2022 Atlantic hurricane season. See also Gonzalo of 2020. Similar impacts, however no article. But if the WP:GNG issues can be fixed, then Danielle may potentially have an article. Sarrail ( talk) 14:30, 28 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Merge unless more info can be found. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 19:56, 28 October 2022 (UTC) reply

I have found more info, and info stating that a death occurred. Hurricane Chandler ( talk) 17:23, 29 October 2022 (UTC) reply

But not more information establishing the notability of the hurricane. Drdpw ( talk) 17:46, 29 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Danielle has zero damage and fatalities. ( WP:NOPAGE) said Sometimes, a notable topic can be covered better as part of a larger article, where there can be more complete context that would be lost on a separate page. HurricaneEdgar 03:35, 30 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Merge into 2022 Atlantic hurricane season for the reasons stated above, especially WP:NOPAGE. The best place to present the storm to readers is in the 'Systems' section of the season article. Drdpw ( talk) 17:46, 29 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Merge into the 2022 Atlantic hurricane season. Danielle had impacts, but not enough for an article. Everything stated here has already been mentioned in the main article. Sorry for causing trouble about this. Hurricane Chandler ( talk) 19:51, 29 October 2022 (UTC) reply

• Keep (as AFC acceptor) - Maybe I made the mistake of reading the project guideline and assuming that it meant what it says, rather than knowing what the unwritten rules are about tropical storm articles. Maybe it was a mistake to think that an ArbCom case would be enough so that the rules about tropical storm articles are actually written rather than being unwritten. However, the guideline says:

  Hurricanes, typhoons etc should only receive a separate article if they are notable and long enough not to be considered a stub. If a storm isn't notable and/or there isn't enough to write about, the text can go inside the article for the season or country list.

  In the absence of a special notability guideline, almost every tropical storm satisfies general notability, which requires significant coverage by reliable sources, and tropical storms always get that. The article in question is not a stub. So I accepted the draft, which apparently was a mistake because there are unwritten guidelines for notability. I inferred, since the included material in the season article is normally one or two paragraphs, which is stub-class, that that was the usual rule for text in the season article, so that longer drafts can be accepted. I thought that maybe the written guideline was the actual guideline. If so, keep. Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:22, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

WP:ROUTINE weather reports can't be considered "significant coverage" or else every thunderstorm that ever formed would get an article. Multiple weather stations track storms and report on them as they go through regions. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 15:17, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

• Comment - My advice is either that the guideline be revised to reflect the unwritten rules, or that the project stop using Articles for Creation, which relies on reviewers who are not initiated into the unwritten rules. Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:22, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep - Danielle made landfall in Portugal, almost destroying a town. State of Emergency in Portugal! Portugal is not a normal area to be hit by tropical storms. Hurricane Edgar stated that Danielle caused no fatalities or damage, but that is not true at all. While no fatalities occurred, one person was rushed to the hospital, while as I mentioned above, a town was almost destroyed. Also 644 accidents… IN PORTUGAL!

Hurricane Su ( talk) 01:27, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Danielle was not a tropical storm when it hit Portugal, and the total damage done was never reported. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 15:26, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Merge We should not have standalone articles for stat storms like this one. StellarHalo ( talk) 07:34, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Keep - Per Hurricane Su. Landfall in Portugal, 644 accidents, and overall a strange hurricane; I think Danielle should have an article, and the article also has much more info than the Season Article. And Knowledgekid87, your reply to @ Robert McClenon is not true. Danielle is more notable than "Any Thunderstorm that has Formed", because not every Thunderstorm has hit Portugal. Hurricane Chandler ( talk) 21:17, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Keep - Per Hurricane Su. Knowledgekid87 made good points, but Danielle isn't just any thunderstorm. 644 accidents in a country that is rarely hit by hurricanes is pretty notable to me. Also, the article on Danielle is quite large. MoldovaballMapping ( talk) 21:19, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

If the storm is just notable for the floods then why not make an article focused on that? Again Danielle was NOT a tropical storm OR a Hurricane when it hit Portugal, extratropical storms also can form Worldwide. Do you have any kind of source that backs up a record being broken for this particular storm? - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 01:09, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Keep Danielle isn't some random ordinary thunderstorm. It was a strong extratropical storm that made landfall in Portugal, causing significant damages, as per above. If not, why should Melissa have one? Sarrail ( talk) 21:26, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Agreed. Melissa caused damage, but so did Danielle. If Melissa has one, Danielle should too. MoldovaballMapping ( talk) 21:48, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

@ Sarrail @ MoldovaballMapping This is a WP:OSE Argument. HurricaneEdgar 21:59, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

For now, it is. However, we can exclude it at any time when discussing if the topic is notable. I do still think that Robert McClenon's and Hurricane Su's comments may be useful, in this case. Sarrail ( talk) 22:02, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Since there is example of article but you cannot make a convincing argument based solely on whether other article. HurricaneEdgar 23:58, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Danielle caused notable damage (644 accidents), landfall in Portugal (rarely affected by tropical cyclones), no deaths but one "severe" (heart attack) injury, and the town of Mantegias was almost completely destroyed. Also, you must admit that Danielle was a strange storm, forming and becoming a hurricane quite far north. Hurricane Chandler ( talk) 01:07, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Except as I pointed out above, Portugal is where extratropical storms form. Danielle was not a tropical cyclone when it hit the country. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 01:17, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Storms that form in Portugal usually move west, while Danielle moved east into Iberia. Therefore, giving Danielle another notable quality. Hurricane Su ( talk) 01:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

I couldn't find any sources on how it was unusual for Danielle to strike Portugal as an extratropical storm. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 01:34, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Only unusual "thing" on Danielle is how north it formed for the first hurricane of this season. [1] Sarrail ( talk) 01:52, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Danielle caused notable damage, this is enough to be an article? if there is one severe heart attack injury, is this enough to be an article? this is clearly WP:NOPAGE. HurricaneEdgar 01:42, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

The article is large, impact is expanded, and all the guidelines for the article to be kept (ex. Expansion and sources) have been fulfilled. Hurricane Su ( talk) 10:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Even with the WP:ROUTINE coverage for the "Meteorological history", this article clocks in at 12KB which falls well below the 40KB threshold. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 13:07, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Keep - per @ Hurricane Su and @ Sarrail Hurricane Larry ( talk) 23:34, 1 November 2022 (UTC) — Hurricane Larry ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply

Keep - Italyoz484 ( talk) 16:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

per who? Hurricane Chandler ( talk) 22:09, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

per me Italyoz484 ( talk) 13:46, 3 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Why do you keep an article without a valid reason? HurricaneEdgar 15:05, 3 November 2022 (UTC) reply

You didn't put any info. Why should you depend on yourself? Sarrail ( talk) 13:56, 3 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Why depend on yourself. Put Per Hurricane Su or Robert McClenon, you have stated nothing so.... Hurricane Chandler ( talk) 21:47, 3 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm relisting this discussion as it has attracted a lot of new editors. It looks like the consensus is divided between Keep and Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 3 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Keep - I believe it should be kept, as previously mentioned, there were effects in Iberia from its extratropical stage. I also believe it should be kept as its track is rather odd, forming into a hurricane at a rather high lattitude. - Sria-72 ( talk) 23:39, 3 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Keep I only briefly scanned through it, but the article seems good enough to stay. A storm does not always need to be super impactful to get an article, especially considering the fact that almost every tropical cyclone that hits the United States is given an article these days. Honestly, the more info the article can provide, the more the storm impacts, regardless of whether or not its severe or minor, is known. This article meets the notable criteria in my opinion so I see no problem with it. ChessEric ( talk · contribs) 05:45, 7 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Keep This article should be kept, and I agree with ChessEric's reasoning above. Hurricane Danielle is still notable for its track and its effects – despite being minimal. Also, the article looks good too (i.e. no citation issues). Vida0007 ( talk) 09:53, 7 November 2022 (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.