Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of traffic collisions (2015–present)

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 merge to List of notable traffic collisions (2000–present). consensus was to merge existing notable (i.e. those with wikipages) accidents into a newly created page combining the time period of all 3 existing articles. (non-admin closure) Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:51, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of traffic collisions (2015–present)

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

Verging on WP:RUNOFTHEMILL but I cannot find any guidelines regarding ROTM road accidents - all are non notable bar the odd few with their own pages. There are millions of RTCs every year that are non-notable. We do not need a list for all of them that have BBC News articles.

Same applies for; and also nominating:

Nördic Nightfury 11:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Nördic Nightfury 11:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Nördic Nightfury 11:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - a "list of road accidents" might be sustainable if it is restricted to accidents that have articles on Wikipedia. Eligible contents from the above lists can be included therein. Mjroots (talk) 15:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all three (possibly merge into one list), but only the entries with articles for navigational purposes. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all the notable entries. That should fix this car-crash of an article. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:24, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. Mixed feelings - I see an entry for an incident in the USA where there were no deaths, but another in Toga where there were 48 deaths. I wouldn't describe the latter as run of the mill. Langcliffe (talk) 07:07, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:13, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge notable, blue-linked entries with their own articles into an article titled List of traffic collisions (2000–present). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:20, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 05:10, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete there are far too many traffic collisions in this year for this list to be comprehensive; the selection of events for this page is inherently biased. Individual events might be notable, and a category for them might be relevant, but having this as a stand-alone page seems silly. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:15, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all and move toList of notable traffic collisions (2000–present) as having a page simply on run-of-the-mill traffic collisions seems too silly, but the page itself seems worthy for improvement. ToThAc (talk) 19:36, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J 947^{^{^(c)}} 01:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete but allow a new article per Mjroots it would be better to avoid the term collisions as some items in the article are not actually collisions with anything. If the article is kept it should be pruned as a lot of entries that both fail to meet the self-imposed ten-death criteria and are really not noteworthy (they really need to have a related article). MilborneOne (talk) 18:25, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- For info - List of traffic collisions is there to be edited and renamed. Mjroots (talk) 18:28, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'd per this vote had I not voted already, mainly because deletion is not cleanup. It seems silly to keep these articles, yet it might be reasonable to have a list on notable traffic collisions. See List of bridge failures as an excellent example. ToThAc (talk) 00:24, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all. Usefull and sourced information. 185.59.158.22 (talk) 12:16, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

185.59.158.22:- Two questions - define "Useful" within the topic and where are the sources for the unsourced items? Nördic Nightfury 15:09, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah...that vote might fall under question per ITSUSEFUL.

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.