Talk:Hanover Township, Columbiana County, Ohio

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Explosion - should this be included?

The following material has been inserted into the article under the header Tennessee Gas Pipeline Explosion:

On Thursday, February 10, 2011, a pipeline in Dungannon, on the south side of McKaig Rd, shot flames 200 feet into the air that were visible for 40 miles. No fatalities or injuries were reported and minimal damage was done to two near farm houses.

I searched on Gooogle and there are dozens of news articles on this explosion over several days - see here. These are in local and national sources including the Wall Street Journal, Reuters, CNN, etc. So this can be sourced to reliable sources and it looks to me like it may be notable. What do others think? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:31, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't be opposed to it being included as part of the overall history with the sources. Right now the article lacks any history at all, so this explosion by itself seems way out of place. The problem with news is that it is often picked up by one agency and spread to others, which gives it the appearance of larger notability than it really had. Was this a top story outside of Columbiana County? I don't think so, but it has enough notability to be mentioned here as part of a larger history, especially a very rural area like this. It's certainly a part of the township's history, but not enough to be its own section or article. Unless this event triggers some other significant, notable event (like law changes or the, then it will soon fade into the realm of trivia rather than a highly notable event or even something that was a major player in the development of the township. --JonRidinger (talk) 05:09, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Another thing I had thought of was to include the infrastructure of the township in the article - looking at maps it seems like U.S. Route 30 and Ohio State Route 172 cross the twonship east-west, a rail line crosses east-west near US 30, Ohio State Route 9 crosses north-south, and the gas pipelines cross the southeast corner diagonally (and looks like at least one cross north-south from the USGS topo map). I know Quehanna Wild Area which is an FA mentions gas pipelines. There are also Guilford Lake State Park and Zepernick Wildlife Area. If the pipeline(s) are mentioned, I think a sentence on the explosion could be added. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:04, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I think that would be very appropriate and would put the event in proper context, even more than in the general history. --JonRidinger (talk) 13:55, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I really don't see inclusion of this event as appropriate in any part of the article. Why do we need to include a minor incident that didn't hurt anyone and only caused minimal damage? Is there going to be any coverage of this incident more than a few days or weeks into the future? Things like pipelines are good to include in infrastructure, but isolated events like this are suited for Wikinews, not Wikipedia. Nyttend (talk) 17:31, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I guess one of the main reasons that I included this into the article was because I was hoping that this would be the kick-start to help develop and lengthen the page on an overall status. I can see how the article on an overall point of views seems to be random but, maybe in the future if the article were to lengthen that we could include this in a trivia section. I also would like to look into the article on the Tennessee Gas Company's page as there is a similar article. Zeke83 (Zeke8317:36 24 February 2011 —Preceding undated comment added 21:36, 24 February 2011 (UTC).

File:Tennessee Gas explosion.jpeg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Tennessee Gas explosion.jpeg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)