Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kawa Kon


 * 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. —  Aitias  // discussion 03:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Kawa Kon

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

No reliable third-party coverage to demonstrate notability, nor can it be presumed since the convention has yet to occur. Only sources are the convention's website and the website of another convention for which it is in a naming dispute with. Original creator is disputing the proposed deletion on the talk page, so I'm bringing it to AfD. Farix (Talk) 01:01, 25 December 2008 (UTC) 
 * Keep: I am the original creator of the article, and also attended Anime St. Louis 2008 prior to the split (which I did not find out about until a phone call around three nights ago from a family member in St. Louis, as I am living in Georgia). I think that both the convention and the domain name dispute are notable enough for inclusion in a separate article unless there is a way either 1) to include this information within a section of the Anime St. Louis article or 2) ship this to the Anime Wikia and let it simmer there until the convention actually occurs, then bring it back to Wikipedia due to notability. --Toussaint (talk) 07:34, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 11:48, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Then where is the third party coverage? Nothing is presumed notable without third party coverage per WP:NOTE. Simply existing doesn't make a never-been-held-before convention notable. --Farix (Talk) 13:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, as it fails WP:N. Alternatively, I'd settle for a merge to Anime St. Louis. -- Goodraise (talk) 13:47, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —  Aitias   // discussion 00:07, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:N. Edison (talk) 05:38, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clearly fails WP:N with lack of third party coverage. You'd expect it would at least get gNews hits, but I see none. Bsimmons 666  (talk) Friend? 17:15, 30 December 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.