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 no consensus. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:59, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016 Afghanistan road crash[edit]

May 2016 Afghanistan road crash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

It appears WP:NOTNEWS applies. reddogsix (talk) 03:13, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• This article contains a very notable event, and many like it have articles about them. When 73 people die in a single event, it is extremely notable. This is an example of an article of a road accident with less deaths: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_M5_motorway_crash

Accidents involving a bus are also notable, and there are many other articles on them too with less deaths. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluffton_University_bus_crash The article can be improved upon so that it looks less like "news", instead of outright deleting it. I believe that it would be better to argue on how the article could be improved upon, since it covers a notable event that deserves an article.Beejsterb (talk) 04:14, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment There has been significant coverage of this article. It is however not yet known if this horrible event will have lasting effects (WP:EFFECT) or if it will have more significant coverage as time goes on (WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE). DeviantAttitude (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 15:32, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, significant coverage, definitely meets WP:GNG. Extremly high number of victims.--Gerry1214 (talk) 20:23, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Maybe in a year or two people will still write/post about what was definitely a very bad accident, but at the moment we have no sourcing other than ephemeral, routine news coverage. Mangoe (talk) 13:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. BBC link shows it happened. Death toll is notable. That should be enough. --One Salient Oversight (talk) 10:45, 1 June 2016 (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.