Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 West Footscray warehouse fire

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:05, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2018 West Footscray warehouse fire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Per WP:NOTNEWS, run-of-the-mill fire that is of no long-lasting importance other than to the local community. There are probably tens of such fires a week around the world. Stephen 02:37, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:57, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Satisfies WP:NEVENT, WP:EVENTCRIT and notable as per WP:GEOSCOPE.--PATH SLOPU 05:38, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There have been more developments since the fire, as shown in a Google News search. I added some references. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The fire was in August 2018, there was still significant coverage through to December 2018, in particular for example, which shows very significant in-depth core coverage by a highly reliable source. Coverage and reporting is still occuring at least as recently as February 2019. Given the nature of the fire, revelations to-date, there is almost certainly more to come. This subject is neither a single event nor contemporaneous news. Aoziwe (talk) 08:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as Eastmain has improved the article with more references giving credibility to its notability. Meszzy² (talk) 08:35, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This was by no means a "run-of-the-mill fire" - The Age called it "one of the worst industrial blazes in decades" [1]. The article as it was when it was nominated for deletion did not show the seriousness of the fire, or the investigations it led to into illegal storage of toxic chemicals. It appears the creator started the article in September 2018, and then no-one added to it. There is plenty more that could be added - I will also try to do so, as other editors have too. RebeccaGreen (talk) 09:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Well sourced from reliable sources and satisfies WP:NEVENT. Hughesdarren (talk) 10:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per RebeccaGreen. It could definitely be improved. There's been many updates since. 84percent (talk) 11:24, 8 April 2019 (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.