Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cryptosporidium Galway

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 merge to Lough Corrib. — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cryptosporidium Galway[edit]

Cryptosporidium Galway (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

This is a news report about a water contamination incident. Wikipedia is not a newspaper DarkAudit 00:27, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. This fails the "ten year test" of notability; i.e., will anyone still care ten years from now? YechielMan 04:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Heck, this is more community notice board than a news report. DarkAudit 04:31, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Lough Corrib, the water source, which already has a brief mention of the outbreak. And yes, they will still care 10 years from now if the drinking water infrastructure costs 48-million euros in taxes. Canuckle 06:13, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom Bigdaddy1981 07:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 13:20, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete reads like a newspaper. Notability fails compared to the Milwaukee one (which I'm using as a guide here). Kwsn 14:04, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It did make the headlines in Ireland. For example, and there are a lot more, 180 cases of cryptosporidiosis in Galway and this. It was at the top end of the news spectrum, in Ireland, for a couple of weeks. FlowerpotmaN (t · c) 20:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Obvious additonal comment Which is not to say the article doesn't need a lot more work and renaming. FlowerpotmaN (t · c) 20:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Changing to weak keep The incident would meet WP:N and WP:V, and I have to say that I think it would meet the ten year test, as it did become a political issue, but I am not sure if this particular article would be the best place to work from. FlowerpotmaN (t · c) 21:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into Lough Corrib and rename/delete the redirect that results. Cryptosporidium Galway is an unacceptable name. It implies that Galway is a species of Crypto. Cryptosporidium outbreak in Galway would be better. 132.205.44.134 21:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete this sort of thing which may cause no real harm is the sort of news that WP should not be covering--there is no permanent interest at all, unless it does become a major problem & unless the scientific literature should start referring to it. DGG 02:52, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment and Merge Cheerfully acknowledging that I am doing a bit of back-pedalling on this one -sometimes it happens ;O) -, as I am coming to the view that the subject could and probably should, be covered in the section in the Lough Corrib article. FlowerpotmaN (t · c) 09:00, 16 June 2007 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cryptosporidium_Galway&oldid=1146584990"