- 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 merge to 1991 Atlantic hurricane season#Tropical Storm Fabian. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Tropical Storm Fabian (1991) (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 is a GA from 2006 but I genuinely don't see why this article should exist. The article specifically states that the tropical storm was short lived, caused little rainfall, killed no one, and damaged nothing. Nothing here seems WP:LASTING. The entire article too is cited solely to the National Hurricane Center and NOAA. There was somewhat of a merger proposal in 2011 but it just devolved into an anti-mergist rant mostly based on personal opinion. Though, if there is an argument to keep this then I'd love to hear it but I personally don't see a reason to keep it. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:28, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment WP:NWEATHER states that a cyclone/hurricane/tropical storm is notable if damage reports exist of it, and there were reports published by NOAA of the damage caused. It should also be noted that "there is no minimum number of casualties or amount of damage required to make a storm notable". However, the lack of coverage on other places around the internet or WP:OFFLINE is concerning. TheManInTheBlackHat (Talk) 19:59, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @TheManInTheBlackHat: You cite that damage reports need to exist for it to be notable but per the article "there were no reported fatalities or damage." Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:10, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Plus, while the article does cite NOAA, It only cites NOAA. Per WP:GNG "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected.". So I should at least expect more than NOAA to determine whether this should be a standalone article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:32, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- You make a good point, I'll bump my keep down to a comment. TheManInTheBlackHat (Talk) 21:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge I personally think that this is a good example of where the information in the article could be better presented in the Season Article. However, I am curious to hear if @Cyclonebiskit: has changed his mind in the ten years or so, since his rant on the talkpage of the article. Jason Rees (talk) 01:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Yea, I think the info could be easily merged. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 03:42, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per above.72.80.245.12 (talk) 18:33, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per nominator; storm does not warrant a standalone article and its story can be presented effectively in the Season Article. Drdpw (talk) 19:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per all of the above; Fabian was a minimal system. According to the See also section of the 1991 season article, Fabian caused a minimal amount of damage and caused no fatalities. Sahapamowe (talk!) 06:39, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per above, Fabian's story can be written in 1991 Atlantic hurricane season#Tropical Storm Fabian. Tails Wx 22:45, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge – Yikes...not my proudest moment with that rant on the talk page. Yes, my views have changed and this article can be merged without losing any major information. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 01:29, 20 January 2023 (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.