Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colorado balloon incident
since there are so many strong keeps for some reason) - Child supposedly disappears in balloon yet is found in attic? So he didn't even disappear? . Please tell me the United States has more to offer than this... if we're going to have this kind of feel-good story, I preferred the adventures of http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0915/clyde.html Clyde and have been waiting patiently for an attempted article but suspect his location in the southern hemisphere will not help his cause... and Muffy the Melbourne mongrel... nine years is a long time... I'm sure this kind of story has appeared in the international news... the point being that not every news story could in theory be seen as worthy of an article no matter where in the world it happens and where it spreads to but that on Wikipedia there is the odd phenomenon where American news stories take on an apparent importance not seen elsewhere. But back to balloons,  and  refer to stubs, are not policy and I cannot see what potential there is for development here. One argument for keep says Wikipedia has an article about a girl who fell down a well and nothing else? There are also a serious amount of arguments which contradict . Examples: "additional background will be available in the next few days", "it's likely to be notable enough to be worthy of a page in Wikipedia" and "It might also be cited in psychology textbooks". Where is the evidence for such claims? And please remember that if the boy has been found alive and his family are alive that they are all living persons and that the boy is known for this one minor event
— User:Candlewicke, 01:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NOTNEWS||WP:POTENTIAL||WP:CHANCE||WP:CRYSTAL (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)