Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mount Barker earthquake, 2010

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. postdlf (talk) 17:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Barker earthquake, 2010

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

Notability...We don't need an article for every earthquake, especially those that do not cause casualties and more especially if they attained only 3.8 on the Richter scale. —HXL's Roundtable and Record 23:09, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete in addition that it is really poorly written and not even according to Wikipedia standards, this is not an earthquake which either received mass media coverage, nor any casualties. I say, get rid of it. --Diego Grez (talk) 23:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge Stuartyeates (talk) 07:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Even if sourced, this is a clear case of NOTNEWS. The earthquake (if it happened) had no encyclopedic consequences whatsoever. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 01:05, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not every earthquake merits its own article.and there is no long standing notability as per WP:EFFECT. LibStar (talk) 05:37, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - not sufficiently notable to attract independent attention or coverage. 3.8 isn't terribly significant, and some parts of Australia record that sort of thing regularly anyway. Orderinchaos 04:08, 20 June 2011 (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.