Deletion of Tropical Storm Beatriz (2005)

Comment: IMHO, any named tropical system meets  ''by the fact that it is a named tropical system''. ,  and  are being used as clubs with which to beat articles, and this disturbs me greatly. Is Wikipedia running out of server space? I might be mistaken, but I don't think it is. Given that, and that OTPAPER|Wikipedia is not paper, why are so many articles that are |verifiable using |reliable sources being deleted - especially this mass deletion of tropical cyclone articles? The very simple reason seems to be |they just don't like having them around, and use "notability" as an excuse to be rid of them
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:N||WP:GNG||WP:INSERTYETANOTHERNOTABILITYSTANDARDHERE||WP:NOTPAPER||WP:V||WP:RS||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: per Richard Arthur Norton and the Bushranger. I tend to see named meteorological systems as something intrinsically notable and that ought to be featured in the encyclopedia even if it doesn't strictly follow GNG. Minor ones can be merged in list articles perhaps, but that's an editorial decision. The content seems |verifiable. I would err on the side of maintaining the information and discussing on how to reorganize it perhaps
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)