Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caspian Week


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 07:22, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Caspian Week

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

this article is nearly entirely uncited (3 of the 4 sections of actualy content), and just acts as a collection of external links to a youtube channel, and a reference of some of the dates hosted for events. microbiology Marcus (petri dish) 18:20, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Business.  ULPS  ( talk •  contribs ) 18:24, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Switzerland.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  19:09, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 19:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * All contents are cited properly. Youtube links are videos for each panel sessions, they are not citations. They are under external links for easy guide whoever wants to find specific session of Caspian Week. Esqeudero (talk) 20:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep: organization is notable. It was regional discussion division of World Economic Forum in Davos. Serdaray85 (talk) 09:23, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: article is improved in terms of content and references. Esqeudero (talk) 20:53, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete: Organization isn’t very notable, and most sources cited are promotional. HarukaAmaranth  春香 01:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete The organization in question does not appear to meet Wikipedia's stringent notability standards, which require significant coverage from reliable, independent secondary sources. The majority of references provided are promotional in nature, originating from the organization itself or press releases, which are primary sources that do not contribute to establishing notability. NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 13:05, 7 November 2023 (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.