2023 Paris explosion: Gas explosions occur every day all over the world.  A building got destroyed and a bunch of people got hurt.  One fatality.  The coverage started fading within the first 48 hrs and would probably never have existed if it had been anywhere other than Pairs.  Just because something happens and gets some short term sensational coverage does not mean it merits an article.  What is the long term significance of this event?  AFAIK the building was not independently notable.  Ad Orientem ( talk ) 20:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and France .  Ad Orientem ( talk ) 20:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of explosions where it is mentioned.  Barnards.tar.gz ( talk ) 22:03, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of explosions .  Not an encyclopedic topic with WP:SUSTAINED coverage.  I added the suspected cause and a better source to that list, so I think it now covers everything that Wikipedia needs to say about this particular incident.  It looks like there are a lot of non-notable explosions on that list with their own articles, we might consider redirecting some of them as well.  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 22:58, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The event is very similar to the 2019 Paris explosion , that one (and several other gas explosions) still hold water.  Keep in mind that it happened recently, and new information may still pop up.  FatCat96 ( talk ) 23:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep With one dead, 50 injured and an exclusive school destroyed, this article meets notability.  For a notable event such as this, it is too burdensome to send people off to search through a list.  I’m also a little uncomfortable with the idea that so many explosions such as this, many of them notable in their own right, are shuffled aside and truncated into a list.  This was a major event in a major city.  The article should stand.  Juneau Mike ( talk ) 22:42, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Unfortunately, none of the things you cited are part of the criteria for establishing notability.  - Ad Orientem ( talk ) 23:57, 1 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I’m quite certain that they do.  Try not to be condescending just because your AFD isn’t going well.  Juneau Mike ( talk ) 15:27, 2 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I agree with @ Juneau Mike here as I too think that the article meets notability.  Just because it's a gas explosion does not mean it's not notable.  Some gas explosions may not be notable, but this explosion occurred in a major city, left one dead, 50+ injured, and received WP:SIGCOV .  Gas explosions that happened 10-20 years ago still receive attention.  FatCat96 ( talk ) 21:29, 2 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Guidelines are quite clear.  The event needs to have long term significance, and the coverage needs to be sustained.  Neither of those conditions appear to exist here.  - Ad Orientem ( talk ) 23:23, 2 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm certain that this event has long term significance.  A school was destroyed in the middle of Paris, one dead, 50+ injured (six seriously), and it received significant coverage that lasted more than 48 hours.  The event happened less than two weeks ago, new coverage may still pop up.  FatCat96 ( talk ) 23:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] FatCat96, just let this run its course.  Three editors agree with his AfD nom (one who gave no basis for his agreement) and two of us spoke up strongly against deletion.  There is no consensus for deletion.  Ignore the condescending comments.  It does no good to keep arguing.  We know it’s notable.  This process will play out, and the nominator for AfD doesn’t get to decide.  Clearly there is no consensus, and that is likely how it will be decided.  I hope you are well.  Juneau Mike ( talk ) 00:45, 3 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] One should not take these things personally.  I have been in my share of AfD discussions, and have experience being in both the winning and losing side of the debate.  Beyond that  I would point out that AfD is not a vote .  It is based on the weight of P&G based argument.  That said I would gently point out that there is currently a 2:1 margin opposed to keeping the page.  FWIW, I'm fine with a redirect which seems like a reasonable course.  - Ad Orientem ( talk ) 03:01, 3 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect - "With one dead, 50 injured and an exclusive school destroyed, this article meets notability." is not an argument for notability and just because it's similar to the 2019 Paris explosion does not also make it notable.  Onegreatjoke ( talk ) 01:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of explosions per my comment on the article's talk page a couple weeks ago.  Anarchyte ( talk ) 10:53, 4 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of explosions .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 00:40, 5 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] 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.

Discussion outcome: redirect