Deletion of Heavy Snowfall of Late 2010 in the United Kingdom

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: It passes  and therefore .  It even may seem to pass  for now and for the UK.... but does fall into the catagory of OTNEWS.  Not opposed to recreation if at the end of the winter there are some other 's that bring it into encyclopedic territory
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:V||WP:N||WP:NOTNEWS||WP:RS)

Comment: Too early.  This is |news at this point.  Wait until something actually happens.  The sentiment here appears to be "if you were here you'd know how bad it was, people are probably going to end up dying and schools are going to close in a few days and reports will come out later about how many buses were cancelled".  If there was an article about every time a few feet of snow fall somewhere on the planet, we could start a separate 3 million+ article encyclopedia on that topic alone
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: anything useful to Winter of 2010–2011 in Europe#UK. This could well ''become'' notable if it continues, but at present it really hasn't had the kind of impact that  seems to require. So put what we do have somewhere else for now, and recreate if and when that happens
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:EVENT)

Comment: until the storm can be shown to have ''lasting impact'' into the future, as with the Blizzard of 1977.   was made for this sort of article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: with Winter of 2010–2011 in Europe. It does not matter whether or not it is news at this point. As it stands it is currently breaking records, and http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2010/1201/1224284487918.html fatalities have been recorded, albeit in the Republic of Ireland which has been affected by the same weather event as the UK. The point about whether or not is |news is irrelevant. This event started on the 24th November in the UK, earlier further east of Britain. At what point is it no longer news? We are nearly 2 full weeks into the event. Do we have to wait an undefined period into the future before we are aloud to inform people of it? The article, if deleted, would only end up being recreated, due to the fact that this event is record breaking. Why bother deleting in that case? That's just wasting time and effort on an article that will inevitably be kept/recreated. Simply tag the top of the article as something that is documenting current events and information may change. I have a feeling Mr Snottywong and other deletionists are not from the British Isles - a few feet of snow may not be noteworthy in the USA or Canada, but it certainly is in these parts
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: I'm sitting in it, and it really is just weather. It's a little unusual, as it's happened in November, I'm not seeing any assertion of this being a notable snowfall. There is a lot of |news reports about it from UK sources, but that's because it's what is playing on people's minds. It may become notable, if it keeps up, but that doesn't look likely, and we |shouldn't be guessing that it will
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: earliest case of widespread snow since 1993"?  clearly applies. At any given moment, I suspect ''somewhere'' in the world is getting their most extreme weather (snow/rain/drought/whatever) in the last couple of decades
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: BBC News Channel has just called it one of the coldest starts to December in 20 years, perhaps adding weight to , but in any case, I've been looking around this evening and found Global storm activity of late 2010 and Winter of 2010–2011 in Europe, both of which cover this subject far more comprehensively than does the article under discussion. If the consensus is to delete then redirecting to one of those seems sensible. It can always be split into a separate article for the UK if the adverse weather continue as it did last year
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Still in favour of keeping for all the reasons I listed above. This afternoon has seen the http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11976328 resignation of the Scottish Transport Minister following criticism of the way he handled the situation north of the border. |More news, perhaps, but something else to add weight to the reasons to keep. Certainly a lasting effect for him, and I'm sure he'll wish he'd played it differently
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)