Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dimension Jump (UK Convention)


 * 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 the changes and sources have persuaded a consensus that the article is sufficiently notable. Davewild (talk) 15:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Dimension Jump (UK Convention)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is wholly unsourced and does not assert its notability -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 09:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete - compared to other sci-fi convention articles, this one is currently below standard....however, it has been running for a long time, and is related to a notable science-fiction show - with a little work, it could be improved to the standard of the other articles. I guess my concerns are with notability, but they'd apply to the other convention articles as well, all of which seem fairly basic - unless there's some decent press coverage or major drama, how does one assert notability for any convention ? CultureDrone (talk) 15:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - The article is waiting for someone with access to the history of the convention to improve it. Jmath666 (talk) 06:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - it's been waiting for sixteen months! I think that if someone was going to improve it they would have done by now. --  JediLofty User ¦ Talk 16:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.   —--  JediLofty User ¦ Talk 16:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I have expanded the article a bit, updated the next event date, completed the list of previous events as far back as the official website has posted records, and added a few independent secondary sources as well as links to the appropriate primary sources on the official website. The article requires further expansion and a bit more referencing but I believe it clears notability given the coverage, the official nature, and the longetivity of the event. - Dravecky (talk) 18:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - When it was tagged for AfD, I would have agreed that it should be deleted, but Dravecky has vastly improved the article - well done. The article is now more detailed and referenced with reliable sources, which prove its notability. - Nreive (talk) 08:27, 19 June 2008 (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.