493:, "Mainstream newspapers may be a reliable source for some subjects." Since the quake's report was not reported in the Opinion or Op/Ed section of the newspaper, I'm pretty sure San Francisco Chronicle would be a notable and reliable source. And something rare may not be notable for Knowledge, but a (I'm not a seismologist, therefore I won't make any bold assumptions here) quake that strikes right around where Loma Prieta hit in 1989 (decent quakes have known to strike around 20 year cycles) should make it notable. Sometimes it is a precursor to a larger quake, however, USGS has found that the likelihood of aftershocks more powerful than the initial quake felt last night to occur in the next 7 days is low. If this article shall be deleted, we should merge it to another more notable article so that at least it is somehow on record. If this happens, it would be nice to have a
700:
Rim has had stronger earthquakes and if we don't relieve enough pressure on this side, it has been stated we will have a very major earthquake. Noting the 5.6 earthquake may not seem very important but the faults need to let loose on this side of the
Pacific Rim. It seems people would rather more damage and devastion be done. We should be happy we have learned and added precautions to keep us safer. I believe it is important to note this earthquake.
233:
639:- "Time is not on our side! Sunday, October 21, 2007, marks the 139th anniversary of the 1868 Hayward earthquake. Scientific studies indicate that the average interval between the past five large earthquakes on the Hayward fault has been 140 years. It would not be surprising if another large Hayward Fault earthquake happened tomorrow."
128:, I'd like to put it up for AfD instead so people can voice their opinion. This earthquake, though less than magnitude 6.0, was higher than the July 4.2 earthquake. And until the readings are officially confirmed and damage reports are all in, it is better to nominate it for deletion rather than just tag the article. The article has
366:; largest earthquake since 1987 Loma Prieta is certainly notable. This will likely be front page news and will receive many news articles as the media moves into gear. Also expand on cell phone outages; for a "minor" earthquake to have any disruption in communication services foretells major problems for any major disasters.
699:
The article should be kept. The only reason why there is little to no damage is because of the Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989. California has been rocking and buildings are becoming being modified to handle earthquakes. This an important earthquake for
California. Remember the rest of the Pacific
654:
actually been killed around the world by earthquakes of this size as well as in
California. This quake is also noteworthy for achieving over 63000 responses to the USGS 'did you feel it?' earthquake questionnaire, which is the highest ever by quite some margin, again showing it's noteworthiness.
616:
An utterly non-encyclopedic and nonnotable thunderstorm recently caused major property damages and a fatality. This earthquake caused only minor property damage and no injuries. A minor earthquake in a region where there was once a major earthquake gives the local papers a chance to sell some
653:
This is indeed insignificant as far as casualties and damage go, however considering it is the biggest earthquake in the whole of
California with an epicentre onshore for over 3 years it should be seen as noteworthy. As far as earthquakes go a 5.6 is certainly not minor, plenty of people have
463:
in a non-trivial way. There is no evidence presented that this quake is considered notable by the press or by any other reliable source, and untill and unless such coverage exists OUTSIDE of wikipedia, there is not proof of notability and this does not deserve an article IN Knowledge.
338:- 69.181.239.72 just mentioned of minor injury reports. Once again, it's just best to at least let the article sit out overnight. The July earthquake article was AfD'ed 13 hours after the article was started (info courtesy of
195:. From the citations, it's described as a "moderate temblor", "no reports of damage or injury", "electricity never went out and his telephone was still working". This isn't even the top story in the local news there.
542:, but with the knowledge that it can be ressurected. We don't have a death toll or damage count yet - until we get something more than minor numbers, it kind of falls below being a notable quake in my book.
256:, clearly a non-notable event in the bigger scheme of things. (OK, it was strong enough that it has me up at night reading about earthquakes on Knowledge, which is how I came across this AfD.) And please note
726:
152:
90:
85:
415:
Very minor earthquake. Ones of this small magnitude occur every day somewhere or other, and the fact that it is the largest one in this exact location since 1989 means nothing.
303:
287:
94:
117:
77:
394:
378:- So what if its front page news right now. Knowledge is not Wikinews! This earthquake will be practically forgotten within a year. Notability is not temporary!
163:
until news stories confirm only minor damage and that the earthquake was indeed less than a magnitude 6.0 before deletion. It should have been tagged with a
232:
Hm... Notability is still questionable, but besides tonight's earthquake, a 5.6 magnitude earthquake has only shook
California about 31 times since 1973.
321:
707:
132:
on there, which means the article will be expanded in due time. It should not be deleted until at least a couple days after the quake.
668:
It shouldn't be deleted, yet the name should be changed to "Alum Rock
Earthquake". Get rid of the date. That belongs in the article. --
750:
715:
691:
672:
658:
643:
625:
608:
589:
561:
523:
507:
480:
450:
431:
419:
406:
382:
370:
352:
325:
294:
272:
246:
225:
199:
181:
142:
73:
65:
59:
633:. Under normal circumstances I might agree. The US Geological Survey (Released: 10/17/2007 12:11:04 PM (approx. two weeks prior))
585:
557:
236:
I just sorted out their data through a simple CSV sort, but it's all right there. The last time we had one of these was 2001.
17:
475:
220:
81:
459:
Notability at
Knowledge is NOT determined by how rare or how common something is. It is determined by its appearence in
171:. However, I do agree that earthquakes under magnitude 5.5, not 6.0, should be notable enough for a Knowledge article.
743:– Earthquakes in California less than 6.0 with little or no casualties or damage is not significant or notable enough.
155:: Earthquakes in California less than 6.0 with little or no casualties or damage is not significant or notable enough
260:– either something is notable enough to be permanent part of Knowledge or it doesn't belong. Jameson – ever heard of
765:
36:
209:
This was no more an event than the average thunderstorm or snow shower. This was an entirely nn earthquake. --
764:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
317:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
711:
703:
669:
581:
553:
545:
363:
309:
283:
257:
520:
379:
313:
269:
640:
568:
Changed my mind. Notability comes from news coverage that this has gotten, so I'm flipping to a
469:
400:
367:
214:
747:
618:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
428:
682:
573:
549:
516:
498:
441:
343:
237:
172:
133:
681:
Date is important in case a future earthquake originating from nearby location occurs.
440:
Sorry, but didn't I just post that there were only 31 of these quakes since 1973? lol
196:
54:
740:
733:
599:
465:
291:
210:
192:
635:
427:
Non
Notable. Hundreds of these happen all over the shop. Why is this one important.
744:
604:
490:
460:
339:
111:
655:
622:
416:
49:
261:
758:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
727:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/July 20, 2007 Oakland
Earthquake
153:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/July 20, 2007 Oakland
Earthquake
617:
newsprint. It is the essence of non-notability. See the essay
729:, and when I originally tagged the article in question with
397:
has been informed of this discussion. --User:Ceyockey (
107:
103:
99:
636:
The 1868 Hayward Earthquake: 139 years and counting...
304:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Alum Rock earthquake
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
768:). No further edits should be made to this page.
602:; The city gets loads of earthquakes each year.
8:
167:especially when it was already tagged with
264:? If you want to write about this event,
282:- Another article on the smae subject,
151:with reason: Same reasons as posted on
7:
302:- Here's a direct link to that AfD:
234:USGS NEIC: Earthquake Search Results
395:WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area
24:
74:October 2007 Alum Rock earthquake
66:October 2007 Alum Rock earthquake
286:, is up for deletion discussion
517:Knowledge is not a crystal ball
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
147:The article was tagged with a
1:
725:Same reason that I posted on
751:06:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
716:23:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
692:07:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
673:04:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
659:15:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
644:09:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
626:03:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
609:00:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
590:19:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
562:19:22, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
524:01:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
508:17:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
481:17:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
451:17:07, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
432:16:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
420:13:15, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
407:10:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
383:01:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
371:10:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
353:07:15, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
326:00:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
295:05:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
273:05:48, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
247:04:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
226:04:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
200:04:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
182:04:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
143:04:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
124:Instead of placing a simple
60:09:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
258:notability is not temporary
785:
489:Quoting your citation to
761:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
364:Alum Rock earthquake
284:Alum Rock earthquake
497:on to that page.
191:. Not notable and
718:
706:comment added by
564:
548:comment added by
478:
472:
409:
404:
328:
312:comment added by
223:
217:
776:
763:
738:
732:
701:
687:
686:- Jameson L. Tai
577:
576:Dennis The Tiger
543:
503:
502:- Jameson L. Tai
496:
476:
470:
461:reliable sources
446:
445:- Jameson L. Tai
398:
389:
348:
347:- Jameson L. Tai
307:
268:where to do it.
242:
241:- Jameson L. Tai
221:
215:
177:
176:- Jameson L. Tai
170:
169:{{currentevent}}
166:
165:{{currentevent}}
150:
149:{{currentevent}}
138:
137:- Jameson L. Tai
131:
130:{{currentevent}}
127:
115:
97:
57:
52:
34:
784:
783:
779:
778:
777:
775:
774:
773:
772:
766:deletion review
759:
736:
730:
685:
575:
501:
494:
444:
346:
240:
175:
168:
164:
148:
136:
129:
125:
88:
72:
69:
55:
50:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
782:
780:
771:
770:
754:
753:
697:
696:
695:
694:
676:
675:
662:
661:
648:
647:
646:
611:
594:
593:
592:
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
530:
529:
528:
527:
526:
521:Peter G Werner
511:
510:
484:
483:
454:
453:
435:
434:
422:
410:
387:
386:
385:
380:Peter G Werner
360:Keep and Merge
356:
355:
332:
331:
330:
329:
314:Peter G Werner
276:
275:
270:Peter G Werner
250:
249:
229:
228:
203:
202:
185:
184:
122:
121:
68:
63:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
781:
769:
767:
762:
756:
755:
752:
749:
746:
742:
735:
728:
724:
721:
720:
719:
717:
713:
709:
708:70.143.87.217
705:
693:
690:
689:
688:
680:
679:
678:
677:
674:
671:
667:
664:
663:
660:
657:
652:
649:
645:
642:
638:
637:
632:
629:
628:
627:
624:
620:
615:
612:
610:
607:
606:
601:
598:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
578:
571:
567:
566:
565:
563:
559:
555:
551:
547:
541:
537:
536:
525:
522:
518:
515:
514:
513:
512:
509:
506:
505:
504:
492:
488:
487:
486:
485:
482:
479:
473:
467:
462:
458:
457:
456:
455:
452:
449:
448:
447:
439:
438:
437:
436:
433:
430:
426:
423:
421:
418:
414:
411:
408:
403:
402:
396:
392:
388:
384:
381:
377:
374:
373:
372:
369:
365:
361:
358:
357:
354:
351:
350:
349:
341:
337:
334:
333:
327:
323:
319:
315:
311:
305:
301:
298:
297:
296:
293:
289:
285:
281:
278:
277:
274:
271:
267:
263:
259:
255:
252:
251:
248:
245:
244:
243:
235:
231:
230:
227:
224:
218:
212:
208:
205:
204:
201:
198:
194:
190:
187:
186:
183:
180:
179:
178:
162:
158:
157:
156:
154:
145:
144:
141:
140:
139:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
58:
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
760:
757:
722:
698:
684:
683:
665:
650:
634:
630:
613:
603:
596:
574:
569:
539:
538:
500:
499:
443:
442:
424:
412:
399:
390:
375:
359:
345:
344:
340:User:Zzyzx11
335:
299:
279:
265:
253:
239:
238:
206:
188:
174:
173:
160:
159:I'd like to
146:
135:
134:
123:
45:
43:
31:
28:
741:WP:NOT#NEWS
702:—Preceding
600:WP:NOT#NEWS
544:—Preceding
429:scope_creep
308:—Preceding
193:WP:NOT#NEWS
670:76.21.32.2
619:WP:NOTNEWS
550:Dennisthe2
401:talk to me
495:#REDIRECT
197:Crazysuit
704:unsigned
641:Benjiboi
558:contribs
546:unsigned
477:contribs
466:Jayron32
368:Benjiboi
322:contribs
310:unsigned
292:saberwyn
262:Wikinews
222:contribs
211:Jayron32
126:{{prod}}
118:View log
745:Zzyzx11
723:Delete:
631:Comment
614:Comment
376:Comment
336:Comment
300:Comment
280:Comment
266:there's
91:protect
86:history
748:(Talk)
656:RapidR
623:Edison
597:Delete
540:Delete
425:Delete
417:Edison
413:Delete
254:Delete
207:Delete
189:Delete
95:delete
46:delete
586:stuff
491:WP:RS
362:with
290:. --
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
734:prod
712:talk
666:Keep
651:Keep
605:Will
584:and
582:Rawr
572:. --
570:keep
554:talk
471:talk
391:Note
318:talk
288:here
216:talk
161:KEEP
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
51:Neil
342:)
306:.
116:– (
739::
737:}}
731:{{
714:)
621:.
588:)
560:)
556:•
519:.
464:--
405:)
393::
324:)
320:•
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
48:.
710:(
580:(
552:(
474:|
468:|
316:(
219:|
213:|
120:)
114:)
76:(
56:☎
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.