Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/August 17, 2006 Nanjing UFO Incident


 * 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 delete. W.marsh 13:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

August 17, 2006 Nanjing UFO Incident

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Event does not seem to be a notable UFO sighting, having an article perhaps only to buttress the single image shown. ScienceApologist 13:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * To be fair there is a short video on youtube/google video of this 'ufo' . The links to it were removed from the article.  I don't believe it's really an alien ship for a moment, but that's not really the point regarding notability. Nick mallory 14:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - Oh no. The aliens are coming for us. Delete (per nom).  Cool Blue  talk to me 14:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - i found the article ok, a stub can be expanded upon, wikipedia is open to allowing people to add and expand articles so leave as a stub instead of deleting (note: i did create this article) (:O) -Nima Baghaei talk · cont · email 14:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep cited by sources and looks authentic, but is there really more than what meets the eye??? Dep. Garcia ( Talk   + |  Help Desk  |  Complaints  ) 14:57, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless properly sourced. The Canadian article does not mention Nanjing, except in the captions of the admittedly spectacular pic, which reference it to Nationalufocenter.com. Since when is that a reliable source? Stammer 18:23, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Allow re-creation if ever sourced. Arbustoo 18:50, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Refs 1& 2 are indiscriminate sources, ref 4 is a Google video, Ref 3 is a newspaper account mentioning this story only as one example, but showing the photos.  By interpreting the source requirements strictly we can keep such articles out. DGG 00:20, 21 May 2007 (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.