The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. Sandstein 07:09, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2020 Dalton, Minnesota tornado[edit]

2020 Dalton, Minnesota tornado (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This tornado was hardly notable and doesn't meet the Wikiproject guidelines for inclusion. A section at Tornadoes of 2020 would be enough to cover any content here, as is usually the case with tornadoes such as these. I attempted a routine merge but was reverted by another user. United States Man (talk) 00:40, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging editors who were in the talk page discussion about notability: @TornadoLGS: & @Chlod:. Elijahandskip (talk) 00:45, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Altogether, this was not a very significant event. Damage was limited to a few farms and there were only a handful of casualties. Altogether a WP:ROUTINE event. It may also be worth noting that the IP who created the initial draft was found to be a sockpuppet based on their block log. Aside from deletion, I would also support redirecting to Tornadoes of 2020#July 6–8 (United States and Canada). TornadoLGS (talk) 01:13, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral—Comment - This article can be interpreted as passing WP:NWX as it is the first F4 or EF4 tornado in the United States in July since 2004 (16 year gap), so one could interpret it as a “rare” tornado. Also point of comment that AfD filer commented “Wikiproject standard for inclusion (i.e. substantial number of tornadoes, EF4+ tornadoes, deadly tornadoes, urban tornadoes, etc.)” on a different and unrelated AfD. Based on that previous comment, the tornado would pass the “WikiProject standards for inclusion” as this was an EF4 tornado. Elijahandskip (talk) 01:57, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly any EF4 tornadoes are actually worthy of articles. That isn't hard criteria. United States Man (talk) 02:01, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is not an EF4 tornado (or an outbreak) that needs a separate article. The section was fine. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 18:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note - Noting for reference that the article is an article created during the WikiProject Weather/2022 C/B Class Drive. Elijahandskip (talk) 04:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Reformat as the storm at large was notable, as a derecho and tornado outbreak with 28 derechos. It should be expanded, not deleted. 198.134.98.50 (talk) 23:17, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I assume you mean 28 tornadoes, not 28 derechos. If there's enough information, I would support reformatting as an outbreak article. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 11:19, 20 February 2022 (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.