Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bridgeton flood of 1934

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 keep. Sources have now been added to the article (non-admin closure) NemesisAT (talk) 09:38, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bridgeton flood of 1934

[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)

Article cites no sources at all. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 20:36, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:00, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Plenty of hits in Gnewspapers confirming it happened, [1], causing a million dollars in damage, not sure if they're beyond routine media coverage of the event. Oaktree b (talk) 00:24, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Someone needs to add Citation. However lack of Citation is not sufficient to delete an article Greenhighwayconstruction (talk) 01:22, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A superficial search found sources from 1934 to 2015 discussing the flood, from books, newspapers and magazines. The search required by WP:BEFORE would have uncovered these sources, if it had been done properly. The notability standard is clearly satisfied. Alansohn (talk) 03:07, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sourcing problem was fixable, and I don't think there are any other problems with the article bad enough to require deletion. --ais523

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.