Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/9/11 + The Neo-Con Agenda Symposium


 * 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 of the debate was no consensus. --bainer (talk) 15:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

9/11_%2B_The_Neo-Con_Agenda_Symposium
non-notable conference largely ignored by most media Tom Harrison Talk 17:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not a repository for every conference held...completely non notable. There are hundreds of conferences and conventions held everyday around the world that are no more or less interesting than this one is, and we don't report them. Wikipedia is not an info board.--MONGO 17:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - I think the involvement of both Alex Jones and Charlie Sheen provide a level of notability. Plus coverage by Al-Jazeera, a notable new source, gives it credibility - the lack of Western media coverage is understandable given the nature of the topic spoken about.--Gay Cdn 17:57, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep; this seems notable enough for our standards. --Guinnog 18:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Strongest Keep 1200 people saying "USA did it" + Al jazeera coverage = nn?! Why i am not surprised? For God's sake, just look at the participants list... --Striver 18:42, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. 1,200 people doesn't seem to be worthy of encyclopedia coverage, no matter what they're saying. Al Jazeera is a major  news channel with certain political biases, and like any major news channel with certain political biases (as well as most other kinds of major news media - which are all biased in some way of course), they will cover events which would be judged trivial by encyclopedia standards (or is wikipedia going to start articles for every single event with 1,000+ people with a few celebrities in the history of the world now?). Many stories covered by major news channels are not encyclopedic. Celebrities go to a lot of unencyclopedic events. Nothing notable by wikipedia standards here Bwithh 18:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * "1,200 people doesn't seem to be worthy of encyclopedia coverage"? Please see: EMD SW900, The Headington Shark and Goatse.cx. --Striver 00:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ummm... you seem to be directing me to totally random Wikipedia articles? I don't see your point at all. A train, an art sculpture and a shock website? Bwithh 01:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * My point is that you seem to put the notability bar way to high compared to where the bar is for other wikipedia articles.--Striver 03:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't see at all how those article examples fall under my notability bar. They have a degree of uniqueness and encyclopedic interest above any old gathering with 1,000+ people with a political point and some minor news coverage Bwithh 19:36, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Also, there are citations to other wikipedia articles and other web sites which shouldnt be used. Zos 19:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You mean that wikipedia article should no interwikilink? That was a new one...--Striver 01:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Unfortunate keep, the media mentions rank this a bit higher than normal conspiracy crank nonsense. --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:21, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep notability established. SM247 My Talk  00:36, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, but please cleanup. It's mostly a link farm, presumably in anticipation of claims that it's non-notable or a hoax.  It looks real and notable, but it currently reads like drivel.  LotLE × talk  05:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's notable enough. --Musicpvm 08:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable. Wikipedia is not a list of everything that ever made the local news. Kook-konference-kruft. -- GWO
 * Delete per MONGO, GWO. This is a recent topic, and may have been newsworthy, but falls below encyclopedia-worthy. And Charlie Sheen having been there does not help it out, it makes it fancruft (the argument, not the article.) KillerChihuahua?!? 10:43, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * So you argue this is not a "fancruft"? Please read WP:CRUFT and tell me why its ok to have a millon articles on this random thing, but anything with regards to 9/11 truth is deleted? --Striver 13:10, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Striver, you could propose for deletion some of these examples you are always citing. If I know about them, I will probably support you. Tom Harrison Talk 16:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * And get accused of WP:POINT? No thank you. --Striver 17:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Tom Harrison is right. I think you should go ahead and AFD nominate Cosmic Era Mobile Units and other crufty articles which upset you. People do it all the time (but not enough) and it's the right thing to do. I'll support you too. Go on, take the first step!! Tom and I will help you fend off the enraged fanboys Bwithh 19:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That said, don't go and nominate a dozen articles, or all the articles about anime; that would be disrupting to make a point. Just nominate one or two that meet the criteria and see how it goes. Tom Harrison Talk 21:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, sure, since you two wish it. --Striver 21:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

The did'nt work!? --Striver 23:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. --TJive 05:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * This is not a vote, please provide a arguement. --Striver 14:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. per WP:N, with pictures such as Image:911symposium setup empty chairs.jpg and the article saying things like "# 09:00AM Event Check-in & Registration"?, it fails to assert notability. --Aude ( talk contribs ) 21:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, why dont you try to quote the parts that does assert notability? Here:
 * '''The event was covered by Reuters[2], Al-Jazeera[3], The Washington Post [4], the Turkish Zaman [5] and Metro Stockholm[6], quoting from Tidningarnas Telegrambyrå[6].


 * All those people did not report on empty empty chairs, you know.--Striver 21:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep though this article, like various others, will be used as a stage to promote a certain POV that is not reason enough to delete it. I believe notability has already been established by reliable sources. One participant in particular, Ray McGovern for instance, has been interviewed in prominent sources such as The Newshour with Jim Lehrer, NPR's All Things Considered , etc...--Jersey Devil 00:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * wow! that was really unexpected. Peace. --Striver 00:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)


 * keep: Significant high profile event.  Ombudsman 08:46, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per MONGO & KillerChihuahua. --mtz206 (talk) 18:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable crank fest, only yields 22 hits on Google. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 22:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The entire name only gives 1 (one) hit: . But try this: . And who cares for google when you have all the mainstream references? The odd name makes it hard to google, people dont bother to type the entire name. --Striver 00:47, 6 July 2006 (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.