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 Snow keep, and the article has been significantly expanded since the initial nomination. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:44, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Las Conchas Fire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

One line..... KING OF WIKIPEDIA - GRIM LITTLEZ (talk) 06:20, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep due to poor nomination that should be rejected. An article being one line is not a reason to delete within policy and for that reason I prefer to keep even though alternative nominations might have been possible for this article. Fæ (talk) 06:48, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Snow keep based on the developing story and growth in sources in addition to my original opinion. Fæ (talk) 15:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Did the nominator even google this topic? There's lots of footnotes available. Witty Lama 07:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Now over 43,000 acres [1] ~NerdyScienceDude 15:12, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Nomination does not give a valid reason for deletion. Both the number of acres burned and the threat to Los Alamos Lab separately provide notability. There are more than enough reliable sources. Superm401 - Talk 16:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - Nominating for Deletion 1 minute after the article is creates is not an appropriate usage of the policies. Please re-read WP:NPP as tagging so soon for AfD is extremeley BITEy. Story is developing and has various sources. Hasteur (talk) 18:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious Keep Who the hell nominated this for deletion? This is a pretty big wildfire and it's ongoing. Makes no sense to delete whatsoever! WTF? (talk) 03:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While it's an obvious keep now, the original article had only the following line: "Add information here about the Las Conchas Fire that started in New Mexico on June 26th 2011." I nominated that for CSD myself but Fae graciously fixed the article. N^oformation ^Talk 05:59, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While I can understand that not all wildfires or other natural disasters are of note, this fire, which is still being investigated, has the distinct possibility of affecting at least the outlying areas of a U.S. federal laboratory where nuclear and other vital research is being conducted and that is a famous nuclear test site, and this fire (which has the potential to be the largest or one of the largest in New Mexico history- certainly recent history) is likely currently being followed by all of the major U.S. news media (CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, FOX, the AP); not to mention the fact that at least 20,000 people live in the area and that almost 15,000 (lab-based) jobs and numerous homes and businesses are at stake, even though there thankfully have been no casualties reported in the area as of yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.133.1 (talk) 03:20, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the AFD nomination is hardly relevant to the current state of the article; I agree on notability as above. -- stillnotelf is invisible 13:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Complete no-brainer. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 16:48, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep On a par with Cerro Grande. --Jnik (talk) 19:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep They've evacuated Los Alamos. That makes it notable enough for me. asmeurer (talk | contribs) 22:34, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. The article has been developed significantly since the nomination. This is _the_ top story on almost all major news outlets in the United States. I would say that is enough notability to give this article a chance to be developed more. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 23:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep We should keep this article because it is making history. This fire that is going on is bigger than the Cerro Grande Fire, and Wikipedia has still kept that page. So please don't delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.16.5 (talk • contribs)

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.