Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ergophobia


 * 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 revert to redirect. W.marsh 23:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Ergophobia

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable sporting event (even according to it's own talk page) Random Passer-by 23:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC) Edited to add: I should probably have pointed out that it's a hijacked redirect page for a rare phobia which was previously nominated as a redirect for deletion. Random Passer-by 00:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Revert to redirect. The event isn't notable. Hemmingsen 09:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Revert to re-direct. A few minutes searching on google failed to bring up any sources, plus the article fails to mention any suitable sources (other than event's own website). Also the first event was in 2004, very recent which makes it even more suspect for deletion. Sorry, but got to go until it can be shown otherwise. Mathmo Talk 11:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I admit I was tempted to summarily revert it to a redirect when I first saw it but I didn't want to be high-handed without canvassing opinions from other editors. Thanks for the input. Random Passer-by 17:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep This is a notable event competed for anually by many nationalities. The fact that it is not on google means nothing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Greatestrowerever 14:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This editor is a significant contributor to the article. Random Passer-by 17:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Revert to redirect - Non-notable. Google searching Ergophobia and decathlon fails to yield any sources to confirm its notability, at least there are none that I can find. It at least fails WP:N on the multiple non-trivial sources part. Kyra~(talk) 23:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - If the article is indeed correct about more and more interest being attracted each year, that would confirm it's notability; perhaps there are sources off-line (news papers, etc.) that I am not able to locate that would provide the independent sources necessary. Kyra~(talk) 02:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep According to wikipedia guidelines somthing is notable if it is Notable here means WP:N "worthy of being noted" or "attracting notice". It is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance". Therfore it is immaterial if it is on google or not. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.81.80.52 (talk) 11:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC).
 * Comment It is certainly true that a topic doesn't need to return a long list of results on google to be notable, but do we have any sources other than the official website? Maybe some newspaper articles or something like that? Hemmingsen 16:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep This is a notable event. There is clearly enough infomation on the page to show it is a real and notable event and so the page should remain PeterDavids 11.55, 22 January 2007
 * Comment This is the first and only contribution to Wikipedia by this editor. Random Passer-by 17:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I think this page is complete and reasearched enough to warrent it being kept. I think the event is worthy of note and although the page might need a bit of updating, the page should remain. Froggy33 16:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This is the first and only contribution to Wikipedia by this editor. Random Passer-by 17:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This user, Random Passer-by seems to have a vested interest in getting this page deleted. I am calling his neutrallity into question and i think that anything he has said on the subject should be disredarded and ignored. Froggy33 17:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Random passer by is a loser — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjamison84 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 23 January 2007 and the photo is not reassuring about N. If they can get a reasonable number of contestants year after year, ... But i notice there is no independent RS at all: the two sources are the web site for the event, and the web site for the university rowing club where it is held. I suggest that those who voted keep on the apparent principle that it seemed like a cool idea, look again and reconsider. DGG 04:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a notable event, the page should stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.163.84.17 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 24 January 2007
 * delete This could become a notable event, but is not yet one. the article is honest enough to mention that the 1st year there were only 6 entries, and avoid saying how many in the latest. I suspect very few, as some of the article is devoted to trivialities about an individual contestant who fell out of a boat,
 * Keep This event is indeed notable, I suggest that we make it more notable by all competing in Ergophobia '07! — Preceding unsigned comment added by erafferty02 (talk • contribs) 11:16, 25 January 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 143.117.45.82 (talk) 12:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC).
 * Comment The above comment is the only contribution to Wikipedia from IP 143.117.45.82 and was signed with an incorrect time and non-existent account name using the unsigned tag. Random Passer-by 15:47, 26 January 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.