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 no consensus. However, there is consensus that it should not be kept in its current form, so it will be moved to List of earthquakes in Haryana. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:19, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Earthquake in Haryana[edit]

Earthquake in Haryana (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)

It's not completely clear what the topic is: a history/list of earthquakes in Haryana or specifically the earthquakes of May 2020. I'm having trouble deciphering what's written and the topic—but of course, difficulty reading is not a criterion for deletion, and it's clearly not A1 or G1.

If it's the former, it's a WP:CONTENTFORK of some of the content in List of earthquakes in India (see the sentence mentioning 47 mm/year, that's identical)—that is, if these earthquakes would otherwise be included in that list—but based on what is included there, they don't seem significant enough for that. In the latter case, it fails WP:NEARTHQUAKE and WP:NEVENT in that there is no lasting impact of these earthquakes, coverage is not lasting (only a few trivial mentions), and predicting future earthquakes (such as a "big one" after these "foreshocks") is impossible. Unless there is evidence of lasting impact or notability, these earthquakes do not seem to pass the notability threshold. ComplexRational (talk) 01:15, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. ComplexRational (talk) 01:15, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Haryana is an administrative area of India "carved out on a linguistic basis". Earthquake occurrence is unrelated to either administration or linguistics. It is not therefore a coherent topic, and to edit the article into correctly written English would probably not leave three consecutive words unchanged. So there is no value in it. Imaginatorium (talk) 06:17, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and rename to List of earthquakes in Haryana (or alternatively merge to Haryana#Geography, though I favour keep/rename over this). The article is a clearly a list as can be seen from the table. Haryana is an Indian *state*, just like California is a state of the United States. Whilst "other things exist" is not a great argument, it is still instructive to ask if anyone thinks it inappropriate to have an article listing earthquakes in California? That it was carved out of another state in 1966 based on who spoke what language where is neither here nor there - it is a coherent geographical entity where earthquakes frequently occur (including one today) and receive significant coverage in reliable sources and is an easy pass for WP:LISTN. The poor English and incomplete listing are page quality issues which there is no deadline to fix and the article is eminently savable. This is not a TNT case. The number of earthquakes that occur in Haryana (dozens of recorded ones over the years reported in reliable sources) clearly justifies a separate listing to List of earthquakes in India which is anyway only a listing of major earthquakes (not all earthquakes covered in reliable sources). FOARP (talk) 07:16, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. The events only attracted one-off coverage. desmay (talk) 19:33, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't matter as the subject is a list, not an event-article per se. The relevant guide is WP:LISTN. Earthquakes in Haryana have been studied and listed in scholarly articles including, e.g., 1 2 3. FOARP (talk) 17:15, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and rename, per FOARP. The argument in the first comment about Haryana being carved out linguistically is nonsensical - how were the borders of California decided, and why does it matter? If a given state in a given country is earthquake-prone to the point of receiving media coverage about it, it makes obvious sense to retain the article as a spin-off of the main List of earthquakes in India article. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:44, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. These are all pretty weak earthquakes. (Or alternatively, rename List of minor land hiccups in Haryana.) List of earthquakes in India is quite sufficient. The 4.6 earthquake could be added to that list. The other three are 2's; Richter magnitude scale states that quakes in the 2.0-2.9 range are "felt slightly by some people. No damage to buildings" and there are "over one million per year" across the globe. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:45, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. FOARP provided three scholarly papers studing earthquakes in Haryana. That makes the topic notable by our definition and prima facie suitable for an article. Editors arguing that earthquake occurence is unrelated to politcal/linguistic boundaries are promoting an argument not supported in policy and expert sources don't seem to agree. In any case, that is an argument for renaming, not for deleting. Rename it after the orogeny these earthquakes belong to – if you can source it. That these earthquakes are small is also not a policy based argument. Small != unnotable. Since multiple researchers have studied them in depth and published their work in reliable sources then, on the contrary and by definition, they are actually notable. Poor English is also not usually a good reason for deletion. Virtually every article that comes out of India is written in poor English, so suck it up and get copyediting. SpinningSpark 17:25, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  It was not clear if this was supposed to be a list of notable earthquakes in Haryana (in which case renaming and expansion are warranted) or an article only about four small earthquakes in May 2020 (for which I could not find sources to demonstrate notability). I am very well aware that poor writing is not a deletion rationale, but I cannot copyedit unless the intended meaning is clear; otherwise, I risk a misunderstanding. ComplexRational (talk) 18:18, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Of course that's not true. Focus of the article is an entirely different issue to copyediting English. To be clear, I am not supporting turning this into a list article. The sources that have been unearthed show this can be a viable article as is. The only name change I would support is changing to plural "earthquakes". It clearly is about more than "four small earthquakes in May 2020"; the page at the time it was nominated refers to a large earthquake in 1956. SpinningSpark 19:00, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. None of these earthquakes meet the notability for a natural disaster. Ajf773 (talk) 02:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• KEEP Perfectly valid list article for reasons others already pointed out. Dream Focus 06:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not a single name in this article's list would meet WP:N. killer bee  04:00, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is not a list article. Even if it was, lists in which no individual entry is notable are explicitly allowed by WP:CSC. Even if that wasn't the case, there have been notable earthquakes in Haryana; there was a widely covered M4.6 as recently as May [1][2][3][4][5]. The 1956 earthquake mentioned in the article (M7?) is also almost certainly notable as it killed people in Dehli, but sources for that one will take more effort because of the age. SpinningSpark 10:03, 2 July 2020 (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.