276:- I must say, a subject's notability or any classification for inclusion here in WP shouldn't be based on damage or fatalities. The size of the hail alone is justification enough for inclusion, not to mention the cancellation of several major events, damage to key public buildings, evacuations and injuries. Above all else,
249:- Don't think I could form an opinion one way or another until the storms are over, if the hail truly is this huge and striking a major metro area chances are there might be fatalities. If that were the case, or the damage is severe enough I would say keep. -
181:
175:
136:
109:
104:
113:
141:
96:
196:
163:
17:
100:
157:
285:
266:
240:
78:
49:
153:
300:
36:
92:
84:
203:
299:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
48:. I take the blame for nominating this too quickly, I'll wait for it to develop and see what comes of it (
169:
281:
212:
260:
189:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
277:
236:
74:
252:
130:
216:
54:
293:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
126:
122:
118:
188:
202:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
303:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
1:
93:2010 Melbourne thunderstorm
85:2010 Melbourne thunderstorm
320:
286:09:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
267:04:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
241:04:37, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
79:05:04, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
296:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
265:
44:The result was
263:
250:
50:non-admin closure
311:
298:
259:
257:
255:
239:
234:
231:
228:
225:
222:
219:
207:
206:
192:
144:
134:
116:
77:
72:
69:
66:
63:
60:
57:
34:
319:
318:
314:
313:
312:
310:
309:
308:
307:
301:deletion review
294:
253:
251:
232:
229:
226:
223:
220:
217:
215:
149:
140:
107:
91:
88:
70:
67:
64:
61:
58:
55:
53:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
317:
315:
306:
305:
289:
288:
270:
269:
210:
209:
146:
142:AfD statistics
87:
82:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
316:
304:
302:
297:
291:
290:
287:
283:
279:
275:
272:
271:
268:
262:
256:
248:
245:
244:
243:
242:
238:
235:
214:
205:
201:
198:
195:
191:
187:
183:
180:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
155:
152:
151:Find sources:
147:
143:
138:
132:
128:
124:
120:
115:
111:
106:
102:
98:
94:
90:
89:
86:
83:
81:
80:
76:
73:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
295:
292:
273:
246:
211:
199:
193:
185:
178:
172:
166:
160:
150:
45:
43:
31:
28:
278:Nick carson
176:free images
46:speedy keep
213:WP:NOTNEWS
254:Marcusmax
137:View log
274:Comment
247:Comment
182:WP refs
170:scholar
110:protect
105:history
154:Google
114:delete
261:speak
197:JSTOR
158:books
131:views
123:watch
119:links
16:<
282:talk
237:chat
190:FENS
164:news
127:logs
101:talk
97:edit
75:chat
204:TWL
139:•
135:– (
52:)
284:)
264:)
184:)
129:|
125:|
121:|
117:|
112:|
108:|
103:|
99:|
280:(
258:(
233:3
230:8
227:F
224:J
221:T
218:C
208:)
200:·
194:·
186:·
179:·
173:·
167:·
161:·
156:(
148:(
145:)
133:)
95:(
71:3
68:8
65:F
62:J
59:T
56:C
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.