Pular para o conteúdo

Conheça Walt Disney World

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Argentina

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Argentina. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Argentina|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Argentina. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to South America.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


Argentina

2015 Argentina road accident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability. Just a random news story that fails WP:EVENT. Unable to find any secondary coverage besides a passing mention in an article about a different crash. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 00:01, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Drake Passage earthquake (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fail WP:EVENT; this is an earthquake with no lasting impact or in-depth coverage unworthy of its own article. Has not caused serious impact or disruption. Some notable aspects of the article suitable for Wikipedia can be merged into List of earthquakes in 2025 as the list has dictated. An article is unnecessary Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 12:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree for similar reasons. Quake1234 (talk) 12:26, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Quake1234 you need to explicitly vote by adding a bolded Support/Oppose or Keep/Delete FYI Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 01:42, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This was a high-magnitude earthquake—the strongest in over 75 years in the area. It caused no damage but did lead to evacuations due to tsunami warnings. Many less significant earthquakes, especially in the United States, have their own Wikipedia pages. Pristino (talk) 01:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pristino, you've been on Wikipedia long enough to know that notability is based on the sourcing, not how important it feels or whether there are other articles that might also need to be deleted. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:45, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Case in point: 2018 Hawaii earthquake. It had a lower magnitude that this one (6.9 vs. 7.4) and occurred in an earthquake-prone area as well. No damage was reported. Not WP:WAX, because (1) there was talk of deleting the article, but no AfD was initiated, and (2) it has survived a full seven years on Wikipedia. Pristino (talk) 12:10, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome to take the Hawaii article to AfD. Dawnseeker2000 16:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Thebiguglyalien, here you have the source you are asking for: Montes, Carlos (May 2, 2025). «Magallanes registra el terremoto más fuerte en 75 años por activación de desconocida falla de Scotia». La Tercera. Consultado el 2 de mayo de 2025. It exist in the article and is used to state that what Pristino wrote here. Ingminatacam (talk) 19:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It had strong media coverage and much expectation in Chile (national level) and Argentina (provincial level) regarding a tsunami that was expected. It was felt and caused alarm in numerous settlements including the cities of Punta Arenas, Río Grande, Ushuaia and Puerto Williams. Various scientific enquiries on this unusual earthquake are underway. Ingminatacam (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Strongest earthquake in the area in the last 75 years [1]. I would say that's something. MarioGom (talk) 17:53, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "No secondary coverage", my aunt... There's solid coverage of characteristics and emergency response. I don't know where this idea comes from that earthquakes without a death toll are not notable. Have fun enshrining that in a guideline. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:12, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No notable impact on people or structures from the shaking or tsunami, not especially scientifically notable, just occurred in a less common area. Others pointed out how it's the largest there in 75 years but that alone isn't enough to warrant its own article. Just another knee-jerk reaction of an article made shortly after the earthquake happened. MagikMan1337 (talk) 01:17, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Humming Airways (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing to satisfy WP:GNG. Lack of significant coverage in reliable and secondary sources. WP:TOOSOON also. Bakhtar40 (talk) 04:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HilssaMansen19, None of the sources you gave are reliable. All of them look like paid articles. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:28, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Svartner, On which ground it passes WP:NCORP. Let's talk about the references. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll try to summarize the sources:
    • [1]. Infobae appears to be significant coverage, though there is no byline on this article.
    • [2]. Humming Airways published by the subject itself, does not contribute to notability.
    • [3]. Aviacion News this is an interview with the founders, does not contribute to notability.
    • [4]. Aviacionline reads as... very promotional.
    • [5]. Villamaria Vivo this provides the reader with a helpful link to purchase an inexpensive flight. I would say this is not independent.
    • [6] InfoGEI Independent, but not significant coverage; just describes the airline's first flight in 4 sentences.
    • [7] Promociones Aereas Promotional website that provides timetables and prices for booking a flight. Not significant, independent coverage.
    • [8] Info Viajera This is just a press release with 4 sentences of introduction. Not significant, independent coverage.
  • Based on this I lean delete as the sources in the article do not demonstrate significant, independent coverage from reliable sources. -- Reconrabbit 19:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)