Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/6th KAZENERGY Eurasian Forum


 * 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   redirect to KAZENERGY Eurasian Forum. I'm going to be a little bold to resolve this. When a conference series is notable, we usually make articles about a series of conferences, not individual ones. The relevant contents has been moved to KAZENERGY Eurasian Forum, no redirect is needed to preserve the history, but its a possible search terms, so I'm closing Delete and Redirect. I removed a good deal of promotional content at the combined article also, and perhaps a further trim is needed--for this & also the earlier conference sections there.  DGG ( talk ) 01:57, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

6th KAZENERGY Eurasian Forum

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article is pretty much a program for a conference, and that's not what encyclopedias publish. Content aside, I can't find any justification for the topic as being of encyclopedic relevance (per WP:N etc). Drmies (talk) 16:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC)


 * The article is purely informative. Most of worlds economic/energy forums have similar articles in Wikipedia. Legapan (talk) 1:04pm, 29 August 2011
 * The question is not whether it is informative or not; my contention is that it does not pass notability guidelines. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It is also about encyclopedic or not. Is the listing of schedule at a local stadium useful? Yes to the users of stadium.  Its certainly something to go on the management's website, but upcoming schedules do not belong in the encyclopedia entry about the stadium. Wikipedia is not a program guide.WP:NOTDIRCantaloupe2 (talk) 09:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. The general guideline for notability is whether a subject has been covered in secondary sources; none are cited in the article currently. —C.Fred (talk) 17:13, 29 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I added secondary sources, which were used in this article, in reference part.  (talk)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kazakhstan-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 18:17, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 18:17, 29 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak keep the article is a train-wreck, but there are references. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:48, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 5 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, or rename and revise. The sixth Kazenergy Forum is not the subject for encyclopedic coverage. However, Kazenergy Eurasian Forum would be a fine topic, since it is an important event with notable attendees within one of the main sectors of the Kazakhstan economy. The article should discuss the event, and note key elements of each year's program/ guest list. However, the current article is better off as an independent web page, rather than using Wikipedia as a hosting service for conference details. Bella the Ball (talk) 14:19, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – The article could be easily merged into a new article Kazenergy Eurasian Forum, I've improved the article significantly. Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - per WP:NOT, as this is essentially an advert for a conference. Sources provided appear to be nothing more than copies of press releases, which is not independent coverage by reliable sources and cannot be counted toward establishing notability. Could not find significant independent coverage (particularly since said conference will only occur in October).--70.80.234.163 (talk) 14:29, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * agreed. weak keep. delete.
 * The promotional material and anything that is only pertinent to the upcoming event should not be here. It is not encyclopedic. I have edited any promotional material out. This still leaves this article out in need of establishing WP:N. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 07:59, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep – per reliable source from Tengri News: "Legendary Larry King to come to Kazakhstan to moderate KAZENERGY Eurasian Forum." from Tengri News. Northamerica1000 (talk) 06:46, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Cleaned up article more, added inline citation from reliable source. Northamerica1000 (talk) 06:53, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Formatted reference section, cleaned up article significantly. Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:17, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Article could be merged into a new article titled Kazenergy Eurasian Forum. Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Article currently passes WP:SOURCES, particularly "Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:25, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Regarding nomination to delete listed above by C.Fred, a secondary source is now present in the article, from Tengri News. Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:28, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Regarding statement from nominator for deletion Drmies, "Content aside, I can't find any justification for the topic as being of encyclopedic relevance": The article is significantly relevant, and is based in part upon the heads of government agencies from various countries and the worlds's largest multi-national energy corporations, along with world-renowned industry experts meeting to discuss key energy industry issues in Eurasia and the world. The topic is obviously of encyclopedic relevance and significance. Refer to Energy industry and Energy for significant encyclopedic articles closely related to this topic. Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – I propose that his AfD be Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached, based upon significant improvements made to the article. Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:56, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Another notable reference was added to the article, from CNN Money. Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:00, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Improved article more, wikified speakers whom have Wikipedia articles, which also increases the relevance of the article. Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:16, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Article in its current form now passes General notability guidelines and WP:SOURCES, more reliable sources were added. Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Rewriting article to remove advertising and promotional language and presentation. Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Added more highly relevant internal links to "Speakers" section. There are many significant internal links within this article, which also establishes the article as more notable due to a high incidence of closely related article links within the article. This further exemplifies the significance of inclusion of the article in Wikipedia. Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – I added the Under construction template to the article, I'd like more time to improve the article. If it's deleted, it won't be accessible to anyone except administrators. Therefore, I would like to postpone the deletion of the article. Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:19, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Underconstruction tag removed. More significant cleanup done. This article is now much better formatted with significantly improved layout. Many more inline citations were added from reliable sources. As a side note, I find the inclusion of this article to also be significant in terms of covering a significant geopolitical event in which numerous world leaders, corporate leaders and industry experts meet to confer about global energy requirements, energy in Eurasia, sustainable development and other significant matters of global importance. It is much more noteworthy than any article about South Park, The Simpsons, Family Guy, etc., of which there are multitudes on Wikipedia, yet those topics receive more coverage from mainstream mass media sources, particularly in the U.S. In the age of infotainment, television episodes are given higher priority in mass media because they are more popular and attract higher audience numbers, which strongly correlates with higher advertising revenues. Importantly, the article now passes General notability guidelines and WP:SOURCES. Northamerica1000 (talk) 17:47, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – To reiterate, in case my proposal above is missed due to the number of comments here, I propose that his AfD be Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached, based upon significant improvements made to the article, including more reliable inline citations and others listed above. Northamerica1000 (talk) 19:29, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * comment this article was a blatant advertisement for the upcoming event. I've noticed that the list of topics and people are merely a listing from the event program pertaining to and only to the upcoming event.  I think those lists do not merit stayingCantaloupe2 (talk) 04:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – I put the "Speakers" section in the article back in place for the time being, as it serves to significantly improve the significance of the topic, article and event. It is my hope that this section wasn't deleted en masse to make the article inferior to encourage your stated stance of deletion regarding the article. It seems reasonable to leave this section in place for others to consider while this article is in AfD, rather than deleting all of my work before others can consider it. There are many significant internal links in the "Speakers" section you deleted that further establish notability of the article as a whole, and the internal links improve access to other Wikipedia articles. In this manner, users can learn about the organizations, governments, corporations and companies that are involved in the energy forum, rather than having to search for them. Per your rationale, the data that you deleted is inferior because it is present in another source, in this case, apparently in an event program. In this case, the data deleted was, per your statement, from a primary source. Primary sources can serve to establish notability for and verify the information within an article. Per WP:PRIMARY, "Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements that any educated person, with access to the source but without specialist knowledge, will be able to verify are supported by the source." There is no interpretation occurring within the section that could qualify as WP:SYNTHESIS whatsoever. In the process of blanket-deleting this section en masse, many references that establish notability of the article were also immediately removed, which highly correlates with your stance to delete the article. By reducing the notable references I added, it increases the likelihood of deletion. To reiterate, this section is appropriate, meets Wikipedia guidelines to further verify the article's contents, and also serves to further establish the notability of the article. It is inappropriate to remove this data while the article is in this AfD. Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – The following section and its data were reinstated in the article: Main topics for discussion. The rationale for reversion in the edit summary was based upon a Wikipedia essay. Essays are not Wikipedia policies. The views presented in essays should be considered carefully and with discretion, because they are not based upon concensus, are opinion pieces and are not Wikipedia policies whatsoever. There appears to be a conflict of interest in the deletion of data from the article en masse all of the sudden, to prevent an objective assessment of the article being included on Wikipedia. Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:30, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * followup Establishing the notability of future speakers isn't likely to make the anticipated event notable, because the event has YET to become notable. Historical event is something else. So, if someone notable has spoken at an event, that event can become notable, but if they have yet to do so, I don't believe it does. Since the interest of article creator is to advertise the event, holding off until notable speakers have spoken before adding information that will be seen as promoting the event will clear the conflict of interest. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 10:02, 7 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment – My improvements to the article continue to be instantly reverted, apparently to delete article improvements and promote an agenda to delete the article. Please refer to the following link from the article's history archive for an objective summary of the improvements I've made to the article, including content verification and the inclusion of reliable sources that verify the notability for the article's inclusion on Wikipedia— 6th KAZENERGY Eurasian Forum - 'old' revision. This is the version intended for people to view, so the article can be objectively reviewed. Users that want to delete the article in entirety are censoring the article's improvements to prevent stated objective review. Thank you. Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:22, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * response It is indisputable that the page was created with the purpose of advertising the upcoming event. Look at an older version some of earlier versions Please provide an explanation on how the lists of topics and speakers scheduled for a future event makes this organization notable right now. That's like claiming a business as notable based on expected contribution of notable people in the future. WP:NOTDIR suggests notable historical program maybe worthy, but upcoming program doesn't appear to pass the criteria. If anyone else feels otherwise, please provide an argument. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 04:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Delete I see no independent, reliable, significant sources about the forum. I only see announcements and ads. Maybe an article could be created about the forum itself, but there nothings to make the 6th annual event notable. Bgwhite (talk) 21:21, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Please refer to "Legendary Larry King to come to Kazakhstan to moderate KAZENERGY Eurasian Forum." from Tengri News, which establishes notability for the article's topic. Thank you. Northamerica1000 (talk) 23:42, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Eh, you understand that they are paying him to go there, right? Drmies (talk) 16:33, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – Please refer to another news source just added to the article: "Implementation of most of the current oil and gas projects will bring Kazakhstan into the top five oil producers: Timur Kulibayev." from Tengri News. Thank you. Northamerica1000 (talk) 23:55, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Your second source never mentions the conference. A reference HAS TO refer to the subject.  The first source is just an announcement.  They even quote the webpage of the conference to tell what is going to happen.  An announcement of an event is considered a trivial source.  Same as an announcement of a sporting or musical event.  From GNG, "large number of news reports that provide no critical analysis of the event is not considered significant coverage" Bgwhite (talk) 05:30, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment – I disagree with the opinions of User: Cantaloupe2 stated above this message regarding notable future events. Per the rationales stated by User: Cantaloupe2, all of the following articles about upcoming films are therefore also not encyclopedic, non-notable and should be deleted, because they are scheduled upcoming events that haven't occurred yet, the formatting of each article is program-like, and they are therefore, essentially advertising for upcoming events:


 * 2012 in film
 * 2013 in film
 * 2014 in film
 * 2015 in film
 * 2016 in film
 * 2017 in film
 * 2018 in film
 * 2019 in film
 * 2020 in film
 * 2021 in film
 * 2022 in film
 * 2023 in film

The rationale for the removal of the "Speakers" section in this 6th KAZENERGY Eurasian Forum article is unsubstantiated based upon precedent, and is based upon the opinions of User talk:Cantaloupe2, rather than precedent and guidelines. Open this link to view the "Speakers" section of the article that was removed. Thank you. Northamerica1000 (talk) 00:23, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment This article is the 6th forum and not an article about upcoming forums. There are NO articles for 2015-2023 in films.  Please stop making up articles that don't exist to prove a point.  Per WP:NFF, a film must have commenced shooting in order to have a page on Wikipedia. Bgwhite (talk) 07:35, 9 September 2011 (UTC)


 * In other news: The KAZENERGY Eurasian Forum was just created. Drmies (talk) 15:26, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.