Talk:O'Connor Plating Works disaster
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Rhain in topic Notability?
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Notability?
editThis is the deadliest explosion in Los Angeles history. Of course it is notable.--''Paul, in Saudi'' (talk) 12:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
- I don't strictly disagree, but that's not the strongest argument. We need to demonstrate notability by providing information from reliable, independent sources. In its current state, an argument could be made for the article to be merged. – Rhain ☔ 06:23, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- Merged to what? On notability, we seem to have a double standard - if something on this scale happened today, we'd have an exhaustive article. Similar events broadly covered in dead-tree media get tagged for notability for ... being too old? Acroterion (talk) 17:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- To Pico Boulevard, probably. If something like this happened today, it would be covered by hundreds (if not thousands) of sources, therefore easily passing the general notability guidelines. The event’s age makes it more difficult to find these sources, but I’m confident that some can be found. It has not been tagged for “being too old”, it’s for all the other reasons listed at WP:GNG. – Rhain ☔ 21:47, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- Then don't tag for notability, ask for more sources. GNG is not time-dependent, and we allow for different standards of media for different times. You're simply not going to get the blizzard of coverage in articles about events more than twenty years ago that you would have today, and applying that standard to historical events would lead to an encyclopedia of the last twenty years. The NYT is the newspaper of record, and it's one of the references. Acroterion (talk) 21:53, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- To be fair, I didn’t tag the article. My most recent was to maintain a previously-added tag, but I’m not opposed to changing it to a different one. – Rhain ☔ 21:58, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- Then don't tag for notability, ask for more sources. GNG is not time-dependent, and we allow for different standards of media for different times. You're simply not going to get the blizzard of coverage in articles about events more than twenty years ago that you would have today, and applying that standard to historical events would lead to an encyclopedia of the last twenty years. The NYT is the newspaper of record, and it's one of the references. Acroterion (talk) 21:53, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- To Pico Boulevard, probably. If something like this happened today, it would be covered by hundreds (if not thousands) of sources, therefore easily passing the general notability guidelines. The event’s age makes it more difficult to find these sources, but I’m confident that some can be found. It has not been tagged for “being too old”, it’s for all the other reasons listed at WP:GNG. – Rhain ☔ 21:47, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- Merged to what? On notability, we seem to have a double standard - if something on this scale happened today, we'd have an exhaustive article. Similar events broadly covered in dead-tree media get tagged for notability for ... being too old? Acroterion (talk) 17:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- May we agree to remove the tag? Seems none of us really support it. --''Paul, in Saudi'' (talk) 03:26, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
- In its current state, I think the tag is justified. The article needs more sourcing and information to demonstrate notability. I believe said sourcing and information does exist, so I think the article should too, but it needs expansion. – Rhain ☔ 03:43, 23 May 2020 (UTC)