Wikipedia:Too soon to delete
 | This is an essay on notability. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | This page in a nutshell: When there is no way of knowing whether a topic will have sustained coverage, it's too soon to nominate its article for deletion. |
Too often, a situation occurs around the following lines:
- An event occurs.
- A wide variety of news organizations cover it in various ways, clearly meeting the general notability guideline.
- Seeing the coverage, an editor creates a Wikipedia article about it.
- Another editor nominates the article for deletion, citing WP:NOTNEWS, WP:TOOSOON, and other such policies, guidelines, and essays.
- A plethora of editors, established and new, chime in with their own rationales to keep or delete.
- This all happens very quickly, sometimes within a day.
Usually, what happens next is a long, drawn-out discussion with no clear consensus. Why? Because sometimes, it's too soon to delete an article.[a]
The main crux of the deletion arguments in this case is WP:SUSTAINED, which states that "[n]otable topics have attracted attention over a sufficiently significant period of time". The problem with deleting articles so quickly is that there is no way of telling whether the current news coverage will be sustained. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball; just because an editor believes there will or won't be sustained coverage doesn't mean we should give credence to that speculation, let alone that that speculation will be true. Thus, editors should hold off on nominating an article for deletion under such arguments until they can make a clear case for them, and the best way to do that is to wait and see. If someone does nominates an article for deletion under these circumstances, the best course of action is to close the discussion and renominate once the situation is more clear.
On April 19, 2024, Maxwell Azzarello self-immolated outside a New York courthouse where the selection of jurors for the criminal case People v. Trump was occurring. At 12:06 UTC, an article on the immolation was created. Only five and a half hours later, at 17:35 UTC, it was nominated for deletion. Much debate ensued, with many comparing this event to the self-immolation of Aaron Bushnell that had occurred only two months earlier, which was also politically motivated. However, since the deletion discussion was opened so early, despite many editors offering their predictions, there was no way of knowing if the coverage would be significant and sustained. Eventually, the discussion was closed as keep, but without prejudice to renominate later when the situation became more clear. Sure enough, when the article was nominated again in a month, editors had a clear consensus that the coverage that had emerged was not enough, and the article was merged and redirected.
- If the coverage at the time is merely WP:ROUTINE or WP:SENSATIONAL, then it doesn't contribute to the article's notability in the first place.
- Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Don't rush to delete articles
- Wikipedia:Too soon, the essay this is a response to.
- Wikipedia:Not too soon, another response to the above essay.
- Wikipedia:Before they were notable, to show there is no way of predicting notability.