Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anime Boston


 * 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The result was   Withdrawn (non-admin closure). RadioFan (talk) 15:17, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Anime Boston

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A large event but ihe article has been tagged for nearly a year with reference concerns with no improvement. Not clear how this might meet WP:GNG. Searching for 3rd party reliable sources has not brought up much, a single event calendar type mention in a Boston newspaper plus some mention in various blogs of questionable reliability. Contested prod. RadioFan (talk) 02:37, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Convention has major guests such as Stereopony and has over 19,000 attendees. Seeing that the convention brings notable Japanese guests there could be a reference over at google.jp. and/or other major guests websites. I also see references on the article's talk page. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 12:08, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment There are references in the article but as noted in the nomination they are questionable. For convention with such large numbers, it's surprising that there isn't more mention of it in traditional newspaper and magazine sources.--RadioFan (talk) 12:31, 25 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Plenty of potential sources on the article's talk page including Newtype USA and the Boston Globe, which have been listed there since 2007. A search though Anime Conventions Mailing List will also turn up additional coverage in one of Isaac Alexander's media reports. —Farix (t &#124; c) 13:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Knowledgekid87 and Farix – Allen4names 14:21, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * withdrawn - I'm withdrawing this nomination based on one of the external links mentioned on the article's talk page where the convention is the focus of a Boston Globe article, the confidence of editors here that more quality reliable sources like this are available and that these editors will work to improve this article.  I still have questions about the reliability of the other external links mentioned on the talk page including the primary sources which do nothing to establish notability here. This article sat for a year with reference problems and still has them, let's turn the energy put into defending it here into improving the article.--RadioFan (talk) 15:15, 25 April 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.