Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Minnesota

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Minnesota. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Minnesota|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Minnesota. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Minnesota/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Minnesota

List of tornado-related deaths at schools

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

Fails WP:NLIST, as much as I love tornado-related lists. E_F⁵ 21:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Georgia (U.S. state), Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per NLIST and WP:SALAT for being too specific. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:35, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was thinking ever since the new article came out that this one was weirdly written and now is redundant. Merge to List of schools struck by tornadoes, which covers an overlapping and broader topic and doesn't have an exceptionally WP:SYNTH-y section of original analysis. Departure– (talk) 15:16, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't even say that list meets WP:NLIST, but that'd be for another discussion. — E_F⁵ 16:16, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2022 St. Thomas Tommies baseball team

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

Subject does not appear to have the requisite WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG/WP:NSEASONS. PROD was removed with the comment that this was the first year the team played at the Division I level, but that does not correspond to any notability guideline on wikipedia. Let'srun (talk) 03:12, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Baseball and Minnesota. Let'srun (talk) 03:12, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Commen The ESPN source in the article says they were "the first school to make the two-level jump [from DIII to DI] since the current rules were put in place in 2010" so it might not be a completely routine season. I haven't searched for any other sources though, just leaving this here for the record. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 04:04, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to St. Thomas (Minnesota) Tommies baseball. Fails GNG due to a lack of SIGCOV. The only notable aspect is the move from Division III to Division I, which is already explained in the proposed target. Frank Anchor 12:33, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to St. Thomas (Minnesota) Tommies baseball Can't find any non-primary, non-trivial coverage on either google of Newspapers.com, even with the fact that this was their first season in D3, I still believe this doesn't meet the guidelines of WP:NSEASONS based on lack of coverage. Jordano^5³ 16:32, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to St. Thomas (Minnesota) Tommies baseball couldn’t find any strong, independent coverage hence fails GNG. Pridemanty (talk) 12:47, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Brooklyn Park TBM-700 crash

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

The article was WP:TOOSOON and the creator has a history of making articles too soon. I only made it cause there was a proposed deletion warning and as of now though, there is more information and no survivors, which might make it be able to stay. If the pilot is the only occupant though, we should delete the article. -Bloxzge 025 ツ — Preceding undated comment added 04:11, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should wait and see with more information if this is going to be significant or not.Lucthedog2 (talk) 02:22, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, United States of America, and Minnesota. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:41, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – "This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 30." Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:46, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•Delete per WP:NOTNEWS, single fatality incident as confirmed by emergency responders on scene, see ASN database for updated narrative. A crash in a highly populated area does not make such crash notable as we shouldnt base articles of what coulda or woulda happened. ASN Database Lolzer3k 14:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is just like the Learjet fiasco that happened in Philadelphia, A plane crashed into a highly populated area mind you, just like the learjet in Philly. The page still needs to be updated with info, and needs to be currently updated, as an investigation into this crash is currently going on. I also agree with the people claiming that this article is "too soon" but just like the learjet crash, an investigation is going on. Shaneapickle (talk) 16:51, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just like the Philadelphia crash though as the plane was a medical jet with six occupants including a pediatric kid. It also crashed in a populated area but with a fatality and dozens of injuries. Also, with every plane crash there's an investigation, so that's not a reason to keep it. Plane crashes with a single fatality happen everyday, populated area or not, without articles. This one is no exception. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 23:32, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•Note above arguement by user Shaniapickle seems to be a case of WP:OSE, invalidating their vote. Lolzer3k 14:43, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because this was not an important crash in any sense after all. Lucthedog2 (talk) 19:20, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~I agree since there were no survivors out of the plane that has a capacity of about 7. I only started this when the article was WP:TOOSOON and when a proposed deletion nomination was posted~~.

Delete. Aviation accidents and incidents keep happening (https://www.ntsb.gov/Pages/monthly.aspx) and a fair proportion get reported on some news. The entries that do deserve articles are those which are landmark and follow in radical safety procedure or technology changes (e.g. UA232, or read https://flightsafety.org/asw-article/inadequacies-and-a-misunderstanding/ etc). Waiting with a non-notable article promotes speculations which I feel unhealthy same as explained eg at https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2020/april/pilot/safety-spotlight-lessons-from-tragedy BACbKA (talk) 10:45, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - WP:NOTTOOSOON. Coverage by independent news sources. The fact that aviation incidents keep happening and reported on does not negate its notability. — ERcheck (talk) 13:17, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
National level news coverage, including CNN and ABC News. — ERcheck (talk) 14:43, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was WP:TOOSOON as the creator made the article within an hour of the crash. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 23:34, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per @ERcheck

Waleed (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: run-of-the-mill light aircraft crash, fails WP:EVENT and in particular WP:EVENTCRIT #4. Also WP:TOOSOON, though of course WP:USUAL caveats apply in the unlikely event that this turns out to have WP:LASTING effects or WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE beyond the initial news cycle. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:51, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. only 1 death. 125.227.26.172 (talk) 02:51, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, only news coverage, no secondary analysis. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:16, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:24, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

.Delete this should be deleted because the news about it is dwindling. Lucthedog2 (talk) 15:20, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No news about this crash since the day of the crash, fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:ROTM. Protoeus (talk) 17:22, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Anoka County–Blaine Airport, the flight's ultimate destination, where short mention should be made as is usually done with aviation incidents. Nathannah • 📮 18:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Very little coverage has been made on it in the past few days and it has been dwindling. ✶Qux yz ✶ 22:03, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete run of the mill news story with no secondary coverage. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:27, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Anoka County–Blaine Airport. Run of the mill accident so not worthy of a standalone article, but can be mentioned at the article for the airport. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:50, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Minnesota Proposed deletions