Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solar Flare Triggers Radio Blackout Over Australia

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. Snowy weather. ✗plicit 14:44, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Solar Flare Triggers Radio Blackout Over Australia

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Contested PROD. Fails WP:NOTNEWS, even written like a news article. ~ A412 ^talk! 21:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Astronomy, and Australia. ~ A412 ^talk! 21:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep:The notice you're referring to didn't have any mention of a restriction on removing the notice. Hence, it was removed.I apologize. I will consider this in the future Thank you. Syed Shaveer (talk) 22:04, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, it's actually okay to remove proposed deletion notices! See WP:DEPROD for the policy. The flip side, of course, is that if the proposer doesn't think the issues haven't been addressed, the article will often be taken to articles for deletion for a more thorough discussion, as in this case. ~ A412 ^talk! 23:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Löschen There are about 2,000 M-class solar flares like this one per 11-year solar cycle (see NOAA/SWPC scales). Unless WP:NSUSTAINED is satisfied (it is not in this case), an event like this should not get a dedicated article. CoronalMassAffection 𝛿 ^talk_contribs 22:16, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not in this case The topic has significant coverage as seen here. Just forget NSUSTAINED with Indian sources and even Newsweek talking about it. Toadette ^{(Let's discuss together!)} 15:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The topic of random inconsequential solar flares seems to get significant coverage, but I am seeing very little about the February 6, 2024 event that this article is focusing on. For example, the Newsweek article I believe you are referring to is covering an X1.9-class flare that occurred on February 22. Furthermore, in this Wikipedia article, only refs 1, 2, 5, and 9 are actually about the February 6 event. The rest are about other, unrelated flares. CoronalMassAffection 𝛿 ^talk_contribs 19:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The original PROD was on the money: WP:NOTNEWS. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – NOTNEWS violations (news style title and content is guaranteed deletion). Toadette ^{(Let's discuss together!)} 15:07, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:NOTNEWS, title of article already reads like a news article instead of an encyclopaedia entry. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:58, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Löschen: WP:NOTNEWS, could just be a brief sentence in Solar cycle 25 instead of an entire article about a non-notable solar flare. Sadustu Tau (talk) 16:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please delete the page if it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Syed Shaveer (talk) 19:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:NOTNEWS applies here. desmay (talk) 19:16, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not encyclopedic at all and reads like a news report. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 22:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Insignificant news coverage (see WP:NOTNEWS). HarukaAmaranth ^春 _香 08:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete after researching, can't find anything that suggests notability --Devoke water 23:31, 16 March 2024 (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.