2024 AT&T outage : Did not turn out to be a cyberattack.  elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:18, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 February 23 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 23:36, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business , Computing ,  and United States of America .  Shaws username .  talk .  23:57, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 00:02, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep large enough event that has received international attention and raising concerns about the infrastructure around American cellular networks.  PaulRKil ( talk ) 03:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Seems similar to the Rogers outage in Canada a while ago.  Which was also due to a hardware upgrade...  This seems well sourced.  Also received international attention [3] , indicating notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:34, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  News coverage on its own does not confer notability.  This is a detail of History of AT&T , not its own historical event.  If several sources come out in the following years recapping the sequence of events or studying its effects (not just adding new developments), then the subject will be notable.  The big ugly alien ( talk ) 00:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete An example of an outage due to a system upgrade, a relatively common occurrence.  Very little, if any, coverage in international media.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 19:16, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Doubling down on example of a regular outage.  While sketchy that there were no details on this event we can only assume why.  Soggycheese ( talk ) 17:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per nom.  Drowssap SMM 19:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  It's the assumed principle that an outage of significance would have lasted longer than a few hours.  Plus the outage was not due to a cyberattack, therefore the WP:SIGCOV is mainly WP:ROUTINE mentions.  Conyo14 ( talk ) 21:08, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong keep Massive outage that impacted all 50 states.  Incidentally, the 71,000 figure are just the people who reported the outage online.  This outage impacted millions.  Strong keep, as a notable, and preventable, event.  Juneau Mike ( talk ) 21:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This is not a notable event that deserves its own page.  More people lose power and other utilities on a regular basis than this one off outage.  Xxavyer ( talk ) 22:47, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep It seems notable on a facial examination- we talk about cell phone blackouts it other regions, albeit normally in the context of elections and the dates on this match to no primary dates.  In a another point, it seems this page has the publics attention more than most newly created pages.  https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/? project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=latest-20&pages=2024_AT%26T_outage — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.178.80.250 ( talk ) 20:30, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , WP:NOTNEWS .  Fram ( talk ) 08:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify and come back in a couple of months to see whether this event has a WP:LASTING impact, as measured by persistent coverage.  Too soon to decide at this point.  Owen× ☎ 00:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Again, this discussion seems to consist of whether or not the participants think this event is important.  Could there be examination on whether the sources demonstrate notability?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:36, 1 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Run of the mill outage.  Clear case of WP:NOTNEWS .  TH1980 ( talk ) 02:43, 3 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Wikipedia is not a newspaper.  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 14:28, 4 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This needs to be kept It was a major event.  ChristianP007 ( talk ) 01:08, 5 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Needs to be kept .  We are currently in another outage and with no news on this happening again makes me suspicious of a cyber attack (considering last time it was a "unplanned" update((also no news coverage)).  Soggycheese ( talk ) 15:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting as we are still getting editors' opinion of this event (not important) instead of evaluation of the sources and whether or not THEY establish notability.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into a list of newsworthy (but not independently notable) outages.  BD2412 T 00:12, 9 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Do you have a target article in mind?  Conyo14 ( talk ) 00:25, 9 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] No, but if we don't have such a list, then we should certainly create one.  BD2412 T 01:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with AT&T -- Devoke water 15:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge/Redirect : There is a list at Internet outage , but the scale of most are currently so outsized compared with this one that it probably doesn't belong there - the 2022 Rogers Communications outage , with >12mil affected for 5+ days was an order of magnitude greater than this one on current figures, for instance, where "millions" (>1.7) were affected for 11 hours.  Given that there are now investigations opened by the FCC and the NY AG, and that there's some coverage weeks after the outage , WP:RUNOFTHEMILL and WP:NOTNEWS arguments don't quite apply.  I've created a section at AT&T#Criticism and controversies using the para at History of AT&T , so it's definitely not a Delete, and am landing on a Merge/Redirect rather than a wait-and-see Weak Keep because there's limited depth of coverage (a lot of articles but covering much the same ground), and I expect that the FCC and NY AG investigations won't expand much (perhaps some fines), and hence if this were kept and returned to AFD once reporting is done then a Merge/Redirect outcome would be even clearer.  If WP:LASTING does turn out to really be met, then it can be restored to article then.  ~ Hydronium ~ Hydroxide ~ (Talk) ~ Merge to the section at AT&T - a fair amount of the information already seems to be there so a standalone article now adds fairly little for readers.  Gazamp ( talk ) 17:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Opinion is now swinging towards a Merge, I think with AT&T#2024 outage .  How does this strike editors who participated here earlier?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  21:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – The notability argument does not apply, as the event made news even outside the United States.  Svartner ( talk ) 05:17, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – Reasonable number of reliable sources establishes notability, might worth an expansion.  Toadette ( Let's discuss together! ) 21:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Despite being affected myself, I believe the article violates NOTNEWS since it was  1. relatively small in its impact (less than even 100,000),  2. Pretty localized within only a few big cities, so while nationwide, was not random and far reaching like one would expect,  3. Was fixed within hours, and  4. There has been no significant media coverage of the event since.  For these reasons, I believe the article should be deleted for its news-like coverage.  Cheers!  Johnson 524 18:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or Redirect to AT&T#2024 outage .  There is already a paragraph there about this incident that covers it sufficiently and whatever little new information worth mentioning can be added there.  It had no long-term lasting impacts as almost a month later, almost everyone has forgotten about it.  2603:7000:26F0:74B0:B111:E5E5:6E07:FFB6 ( talk ) 19:47, 19 March 2024 (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