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. czar 23:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Milan nursing home fire[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

All the coverage I found is from July 2023 which demonstrates no WP:LASTING coverage to meet WP:EVENT. LibStar (talk) 14:37, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Italy. LibStar (talk) 14:37, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Exactly nothing found after the July 2023 reporting, so no lasting effect. I imagine there would be follow up in the local media, but the international news has moved on, so I don't see much notability at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 14:43, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There is some post-July coverage in local and regional outlets (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4), the most notable of which concerns a fire in an adjacent building. Unsurprisingly, these outlets also carry follow-up articles on the building's requisition and the fire's investigation. There was also a press release (5) from Milan's city council at the start of the month regarding concession procedures for the affected property. Moreover, a local newspaper article from two weeks ago suggests that delays in inspecting nursing homes after the fire have been a talking point in local politics (6), and there's another article from last week about inspecting nursing homes in Liguria (a different region of Italy) following the fire (7).

I'm not feeling confident and would be interested to hear what other editors think, but these sources lead me to think that it's possibly still WP:TOOSOON to evaluate the fire's lasting effects, particularly if it leads to significant inspections or regulatory changes in Italian nursing homes. On the other hand, as far as I know, the Italian-language Wikipedia doesn't carry an article about this event, and I can't imagine that English-language editors will be more likely to care about any such changes than Italian-language editors. In terms of WP:ATD, if Corvetto (Milan) [it] had an entry in the English-language Wikipedia, it would be an obvious redirect target (and I would suggest redirecting there until lasting notability is clearer), but for a city of its size, this fire is hardly worth a mention in Milan. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifying in light of subsequent discussion: The sources I've found above do not suggest that there have already been regulatory changes, but these sources could be used to support a "Keep" or "Draftify" vote on the basis of WP:RAPID/that WP:LASTING still unclear. Regulatory changes as a result of the fire still seem possible, given the extent to which the fire is still cited in discussions about inspections on Italian nursing homes, not just in Milan but in other regions of Italy too. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 01:59, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Being in the news does not in itself confer notability. The article shouldn't be created unless sources are written covering the whole response retrospectively or analyzing its legacy. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:34, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article needs improvement but it appears there has been regulatory changes in response to the incident which indicates lasting significance. The article needs to be updated to include these recent developments. AusLondonder (talk) 11:41, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"there has been regulatory changes in response to the incident which indicates lasting significance" , could you please provide sources for that. LibStar (talk) 22:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: to identify whether or not this fire has led to regulatory changes
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:48, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Per last relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per NEVENT I am not seeing sustained coverage warranting the inclusion of this fire. Such incidents routinely occur all over the world, and it is absolutely typical for them to receive a short burst of coverage without sustained impact or further analysis demonstrating some sort of impact. A tragic incident, but not one meeting NEVENT or GNG. Hence, not eligible for inclusion. If the company owning the home was notable, perhaps we could merge the content within that. Short bursts of news coverage on their own do not confer notability. A bakery near me recently caught fire and several news vans were out the front - not eligible for an article. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:16, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: All things considered, I'm also leaning to Delete now. If any regulatory importance does emerge, an interested editor can always recreate the article, but I suspect that likelihood is higher on the Italian-language Wikipedia than here. The above sources can be a place to start. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 14:25, 16 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.