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. T. Canens (talk) 19:24, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1943 Skwentna earthquake (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This one cannot be expanded into a meaningful, comprehensive, and encyclopedic article. The event's effects were minimal (intensity V) and don't align with articles that we keep and expand. This event was not studied (probably due to World War II and lack of damage/injuries). Dawnseeker2000 13:58, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alaska-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – We don't keep articles about earthquakes where the only effects are "moved doors" and "rattled windows" (regardless of magnitude). The intensity on this one speaks volumes. It was a maximum of V (Moderate) on the Mercalli intensity scale. Unimpressive. There are also no scientific articles dedicated to it. World War II was taking place so I think that may have had some impact with the lack of write-ups on this event. If there were aspects of the event that seismologists wrote about, then yes, we would consider using their reports as sources for adding detail, but keeping this kind of article around in its current condition is a disservice to our readers. They don't want to click a link only to find that there's nothing known about this M7.4 shock except the minimal effects. I don't recommend redirecting either. This event does not qualify to be on our list articles because it's just not notable. I can tell you that there has been great effort (by non-WikiProject Earthquakes editors) put into our list articles, with entries for every ~M6 and above event that's known about (just like this one) but in the long run those list articles are going to be pared down (heavily) to include only notable events. Dawnseeker2000 21:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and above comment. Just doesn't pass notability requirements. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:53, 20 August 2015 (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.