Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Wine and Spirit Competition


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 18:57, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

International Wine and Spirit Competition

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete. [Edit: See my new vote, visible below in my comment added 00:17, 27 July 2013 (UTC).] My research indicates that the subject of this (mediocre) article seems to fail WP:INDEPTH. Cheers, &mdash;Unforgettableid (talk) 00:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 00:47, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 01:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Leaning keep Merge to Wine competition Leaning keep - per one source, the International Wine and Spirit Competition "is considered one of the top wine awards in the world,"(ONE News article) and another source describes it as one of the "big three" wine competitions (The Telegraph article). Another source refers to it as the largest wine competition (The Business of Wine: An Encyclopedia: An Encyclopedia). Predictably, much news coverage focuses upon award recipients, but a source search suggests that this topic meets WP:ORGDEPTH, albeit possibly weakly. Some source examples include:, , , , , ,.
 * Sources:
 * – Northamerica1000(talk) 20:58, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. You've just convinced me that it's perhaps the biggest wine competition in the world. Fine, but that doesn't affect notability. OK; let's look at the sources.
 * You found seven sources. The Telegraph article you found is the best of the seven; it includes six or seven sentences about the competition. The others include even less: perhaps two or three sentences on average.
 * Please visit WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions. Expand the box labeled "Expand this box to learn about notability and verifiability". The box requires "references about the subject – at least one lengthy paragraph, preferably more". How many references? "Several of them."
 * Dear all: do all these shallow-depth sources, taken together, prove that the competition is worthy of a Wikipedia article? If so, why?
 * Or should our article be merged into Wine competition? Would it be possible to do the merge without losing any of our article's lead section or its "Judging" section?
 * Cheers, &mdash;Unforgettableid (talk) 22:40, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Upon consideration, I've changed my !vote above to merge. Northamerica1000(talk) 07:41, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Per WP:EVENT, changed back to leaning keep, particularly per WP:LASTING. Struck more above. The topic's notability is somewhat tricky, but per WP:PRESERVE, the content should remain somewhere. Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 08:25, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:38, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Encyclopedically significant wine competition. The additional sources Gene93k Northamerica1000 identified should be sufficient to establish notability. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:53, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: The first !vote above is mine; I mistakenly overlooked adding my signature to it (added it now). Northamerica1000(talk) 20:58, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Both Gene93k and Northamerica1000 deserve a note of thanks for their regular and ongoing contributions to AfD. Unscintillating (talk)
 * Aw, shucks. :) Actually I don't contribute to AFD much, but occasionally participate in discussions or close them. Wine-related ones like this tend to get my attention. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:28, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge into Wine competition. Despite this competition's renown, the secondary sources appear to provide almost zero in-depth coverage. &mdash;Unforgettableid (talk) 00:17, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * In response to your comment my talk page: The event meets all the notability criteria of lasting effect, geographical scope, duration of coverage, and diversity of sources (international coverage). I disagree that being weak in one area (depth of coverage) disqualifies this event as 'notable' considering everything else as a whole. Therefore, my view remains 'keep'. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:30, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * STRONG KEEP-- Seriously, a really bad AFD...this is the largest such competition in the wine and spirits industry, largest in the world. It's an event so important that a winery that wins a gold medal sees a monumental sales bump. This AFD is like saying the World Series isn't notable in baseball. A quick check IWSC in google and bing results, and at google books, show a multitude of sources that could be used per WP:RS for significant coverage. The results of this event are reported in magazines and international newspapers. WP:ORGDEPTH states that "a company, corporation, organization, school, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. ...Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability." Sure the article needs improvement, but simply, WOW, this is a bad AFD.--ColonelHenry (talk) 18:10, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep The article is in rough shape but the Colonel is right in that this is one of the most notable wine competitions out there. I don't know if I would compare it to the World Series though :P but it would be fair to describe it as the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show of wine. AgneCheese/Wine 19:27, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've found hundreds of references to it in the press, although the article itself could use rewriting to remove advertorial content.  Andrew327 15:40, 2 August 2013 (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.