Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galactic Tick Day


 * 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. Since it was alleged that additional sources will be coming out in the next month, I will userfy the article if requested, so that the additional sources can be added to it. If significant reliable coverage develops, the article can then be considered for reinstatement. MelanieN (talk) 01:07, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Galactic Tick Day

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This doesn't quite seem to fit any speedy deletion categories, but it is clearly promotion of a non-notable subject. Some guy invents Galactic Tick Day, writes a blog, wants to get a campaign going, and thinks Wikipedia will be good publicity. I can't find any significant coverage of this. Lithopsian (talk) 10:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I'll give this the benefit of the doubt and say WP:TOOSOON since the first Tick Day will be on September 26 this year and there's only a single article covering it as of yet. Mr. Magoo (talk) 10:47, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 13:45, 21 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Disclaimer: I'm David. The event is about a month away and will be picking up steam via ABC news, NowThis, Earth Magazine, and other outlets. If the timing is not right, so be it :) Davidsdavids (talk) 21:48, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete violates WP:CRYSTAL. If the topic gets sufficient media attention after the event then notability can be considered, but it would be WP:PROMOTIONAL to include such an article at this point in time. Kingofaces43 (talk) 00:07, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Disclaimer: I'm David. There are now multiple sources, including popular mechanics. Thanks for all your vigilance here!Davidsdavids (talk) 16:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Struck duplicate !vote above, only one allowed, but feel free to comment all you'd like. North America1000 10:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete – not notable. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a means of self-promotion. Citobun (talk) 16:40, 28 August 2016 (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.