Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anime Festival Wichita


 * 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   keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:16, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Anime Festival Wichita

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Extremely limited coverage by reliable and independent sources. Esw01407 (talk) 22:26, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:31, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. There doesn't seem to be enough reliable coverage at this time to warrant an article. Which is is a shame, since it's been running for seven years now. Maybe if there is Anime News Network coverage somewhere, then it could be notable. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Changing to Neutral, as I'll give the benefit of a doubt that the Wichita Eagle hits are not press releases. It's such a shame that many news have to resort to pay-wall archives, especially if such sources are about obscure topics. However, without being able to see the actual hits, I can't say whether or not such coverage is reliable/significant/independent. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:58, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've searched ANN, most of the pages are Anime Festival Wichita Press Releases, none of which help establish notability. The only other article worth mentioning is the death of Cassandra Hodges, that is already referenced in the article. The Wichita Eagle might have sources, but there archives are a pay site. Esw01407 (talk) 19:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Have you looked in the Kansas press? —Farix (t &#124; c) 00:40, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I've searched in the major TV/Press groups in Wichita, I couldn't find anything. Esw01407 (talk) 01:01, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I seeing several hits from The Wichita Eagle. There were also a number of other hits from NewsLibrary.com. —Farix (t &#124; c) 01:20, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Of the convention, or of Hodges' death? If it's about the con, are they actual coverage, or are they press releases? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:27, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * One would have to purchase the articles from NewsLibrary.com to be for sure that they are not press releases. But none of them appear to mention Hodges. —Farix (t &#124; c) 01:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. I think that if there are hits, we have to assume in good faith that they are directly covering AFW and not the death of the VA. Has anyone looked into the parent org and seeing if there is any relevant coverage of the parent org that mentions AFW that can be used to establish further credibility. Also, how does Press Releases by ANN not verify notability? It's independent coverage by a reliable source, given the circumstances and the fact that anime conventions are not covered by "traditional" media, per se. Sometimes you have to ignore the rules to better serve the encyclopedia. LTC b2412 Troops Talk RFC Inbox 13:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Press releases are still not independent coverage, even if they were released by an independent body, because the text was still made by people related to the company in question. And no, I don't think it's a good idea to ignore the rules at the moment. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:57, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 19:24, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll have to go with keep here with the multiple archival hits at The Wichita Eagle and Wichita Examiner via NewsLibrary.com. Although all of the articles are behind a paid wall, that should not be a issue with establishing notability and I am asserting the good faith that the articles' coverage are interdependent of the convention's press releases. The only hindrance to establishing notability is that there isn't a wider variety of sources. Having more than a couple of papers covering the event would greatly enhance the notability of the event, but that is not a requirement. —Farix (t &#124; c) 20:31, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Reliable sources appear to have been found, passes the original nom's concerns. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:48, 12 September 2012 (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.