Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 Henryville tornado

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. G5. Whack a sock. If an established editor sees value in a redirect, this closure does not preclude that Star Mississippi 01:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Henryville tornado

[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)

This article is a near-exact copy of the section at Tornado outbreak of March 2–3, 2012 and is essentially a WP:CONTENTFORK. The creator of this article seems to be the same IP hopping user who has been making very similar edits across numerous IP addresses for months now. No reason exists to have a duplicate article on a tornado that already has copious information elsewhere (much of which is word for word the same). United States Man (talk) 23:50, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional Delete: The nominator is correct on this being a near-exact copy of the section at Tornado outbreak of March 2–3, 2012. That said, it is not a true exact copy with some (not much) new information. I would want this deleted unless the section in the main article was shortened some (not much) & at least 1/3 of the article is new information previously not from the section prior to article creator. If those could be met, then consider this a weak keep, but if those are not met by the end of this AfD, then consider this a delete. Elijahandskip (talk) 00:08, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not sure exactly which way to lean on this matter. Content-wise, there is more than would go in a section at an outbreak article, and this tornado, if I recall correctly, received much of the media attention from this outbreak. One editor did mention suspicions of sockpuppetry. If confirmed, this article could qualify for deletion under WP:G5. If this article is not kept, I would favor a redirect or merge instead of deletion since there is a suitable redirect target. TornadoLGS (talk) 02:36, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I could see the tornado getting an article and it did get recognition from The Weather Channel's "Tornado Alley" show. Also, the tornado was immediately followed by another storm with extremely large hail as well as a second, albeit weak, tornado that hit the same areas. That being said, it can't be a direct copy of an already well written article section, which is why I'm going neutral. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 03:14, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Indiana, and Kentucky. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:49, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The editor who reverted United States Man’s bold blanking/redirect on notability and wanted the AfD was blocked as a potential sock. The editor (different IP user) who created the article was not blocked. Because of that, I think we need to let the AfD run its course since G5 doesn’t play a role here. (Pinging TornadoLGS as they mentioned the G5 pending SPI.) Elijahandskip (talk) 13:54, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

170.24.150.113 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is now editing in this same area (Tornado outbreak of March 2–3, 2012) and is probably also a sock. 148.76.137.251 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) may be as well, since the user already seems to know about AfC, page attribution, and content forks upon joining. United States Man (talk) 14:05, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As is 71.125.36.50 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). This may require another request at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Andrew5 @Elijahandskip:. United States Man (talk) 14:08, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I heard about it from someone in my school, so I figured I'd bravely trim it. You seem to really be trying to make every IP who wants to save this article look like a sock perhaps to get it deleted. 170.24.150.113 (talk) 14:20, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If, indeed, you are a different person, the pattern of an IP-hopping editor, confirmed at SPI, is real. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:20, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That IP address is from the same place as a previously blocked sock address. If this is a different person then the sock is the one that told that person about the article (or it’s just the same person). United States Man (talk) 20:37, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a shared IP address, belonging to Plainview Old Bethpage John F. Kennedy High School. Over 2,000 people are here every day. 170.24.150.113 (talk) 12:02, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Issues should be fixed. Saw this at AFD as I was looking through this outbreak, and figured I’d pitch in. 108.58.9.194 (talk) 19:39, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – This should now qualify as WP:G5 given the Andrew5 SPI here. The closing admin instead chose to semiprotect the page and is still allowing the sock to edit Wikipedia, however. United States Man (talk) 04:02, 5 November 2022 (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.