Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 Heimdal train derailment

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. No consensus for a particular action has emerged here. The notion of a merge for these two articles can continue to to be discussed at Talk:List of rail accidents (2010–present) if desired. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:41, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Heimdal train derailment[edit]

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

This derailment, along with 2015 Galena train derailment, which I am nominating also, seem a lot like a case of WP:NOTNEWS. They caused no deaths or injuries, no serious damage to infrastructure other than the cars that derailed and caught fire, and no long term effects in the railroad industry or quality of life in the town. Within a few days, everything went back to normal, coverage for both was very brief and routine, and with the Philadelphia Amtrak crash taking over airwaves, they have pretty much become distant memories. List of rail accidents (2010-present)#2015 already has an entry for both derailments that is sufficient in covering them. I have seen worse incidents on the rails that we do not have articles on, including a few in the NYC Subway, but we are not going to have articles on every single rail accident and derailment in history, are we?

The Legendary Ranger (talk) 13:29, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 May 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 13:53, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support delete per nom - news event that did not have lasting coverage —Мандичка^YO 😜 14:20, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article is still about a railway accident, regardless of any injuries or deaths. In fact, this article is listed in the template {{2015 railway accidents}}. Paul Badillo (talk) 18:29, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how things work. If it is not notable enough to make any long term impact, it does not need to be kept. Wikipedia does not keep articles of events that are forgotten in a few days. This is a clear case of WP:NOTNEWS. TL565 (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Not even close to being notable as the Philadelphia accident. TL565 (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Dakota-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:56, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:57, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This derailment involved tankers carrying crude oil, a dangerous cargo. Such a derailment would be catastrophic if it happened within Philadelphia, which could easily happen.--DThomsen8 (talk) 01:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- But these accidents did not happen in Philly, did they? They happened in two rural towns and everything is back to normal there. No one is talking about them anymore. These derailments are really no different than accidents involving trucks carrying dangerous cargo, so does that mean we should create an article every time a tanker truck crashes and explodes on a highway or something like that? The Legendary Ranger (talk)`
Delete both per nom. We don't need articles on every freight train derailment. In these two cases, there is nothing that stands out as particularly noteworthy, unlike the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster. Both accidents are covered in the relevant list, and that should be sufficient. Mjroots (talk) 12:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge both articles into List of rail accidents (2010–present). There are several accidents listed on that page that don't even have their own articles and it lists details about those accidents as well. Paul Badillo (talk) 00:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- So did you change your mind? You said "Keep" earlier. TL565 (talk) 15:47, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge both articles into List of rail accidents (2010–present), essentially per Mjroots. Railway accidents aren't presumptively notable. Mackensen (talk) 12:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Unusual situation, the derailment involved tankers carrying a dangerous cargo. 91.124.171.7 (talk) 14:17, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Doesn't matter. No one even remembers this event at this point. The fact that barely anyone has replied in almost a week proves this isn't notable. We don't need to create articles on every single incident that is just going to be forgotten about the next day. Extremely weak arguments coming from the keep crowd so far. It's just keeping for the sake of keeping. TL565 (talk) 15:32, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fail WP:EVENT. RGloucester — ☎ 16:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as above. What could, hypothetically, have happened is immaterial. Choess (talk) 00:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge both as per Paul Badillo. GeorgeGriffiths (talk) 19:12, 25 May 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.