Deletion of 2020 Caribbean earthquake

Comment: Meeting |GNG is necessary and I wouldn't dispute that the article can, in those terms, be presumed to be suitable to have an article, but that is not a guarantee that it should have one. As an event it should also meet the  guideline, such as the need for the event to have either "enduring historical significance" or "have a significant lasting effect", and that the coverage should be continuing as "events that are only covered in sources published during or immediately after an event, without further analysis or discussion, are likely not suitable for an exncyclopedia article." My "delete" vote is based on that guideline
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:EVENT)

Comment: The significance of geological and environmental phenomena is not determined by casualties or property damage. The event passes  and . The votes to delete seem to be based more on individual perception of importance than in an assessment of whether or not the page meets Wikipedia's criteria. There are certainly more interesting topics than this which should not have pages, and more boring topics than this which should
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:RS)

Comment: per . While we have often required deaths for List of airplane crashes|airplane crashes to be notable, |unless I missed something, |we have not required confirmed deaths for earthquakes. This is not |run of the mill: it's one of the few earthquakes felt in Florida in Generation X|my lifetime
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:CCC||WP:OUTCOMES||WP:MILL)

Comment: passes the GNG, not some fanciful statistical analysis about articles that people created or didn't create (ot complete) based on the magnitude of the earthquake. Such a discussion might have relevance at /N|In the news/Candidates, but here it just looks like  DON'T LIKE IT
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:ITN||WP:I)