Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/April 2011 North Atlantic cyclone

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. Tone 14:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011 North Atlantic cyclone

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

Although recently created, this article serves no real purpose. It has no sources, specifically how it's important and its effects. It seems like a case of "it's happening and should be on Wikipedia" even though this storm will pass mostly unnoticed. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:22, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, delete. It was a complete non-event and has no historical importance. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It melted before it developed and caused some minor flooding and rain. Not every system that forms the bare effects of an eye is notable, especially if it packs the mere wallop of an average Portland rainstorm. Nate • (chatter) 23:29, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 21:39, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 21:40, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete with prejudice. If every time there is some weather someplace we need to create an article about it, pretty soon WP will have more weather articles than road articles. WP:NOTNEWS. -Atmoz (talk) 16:06, 18 May 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.