Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kodiak Island UFO sighting


 * 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. Tone 15:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Kodiak Island UFO sighting

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  AfD statistics)

Here are the facts: In September 2007 something crashed somewhere in the vicinity of Kodiak Island. The local paper devoted a few paragraphs to it. A Wikipedia article based on that report and subsequent postings at UFO websites was created. The article has languished in this state for nearly two years, with only one reliable source, and that just a single column story in a local paper. It's worth noting that nearby news organs in Anchorage and on the Kenai Peninsula did not pick up this story. Seems to fail the notability guideline. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:10, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alaska-related deletion discussions.  —Beeblebrox (talk) 20:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions.  —Beeblebrox (talk) 20:22, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete not notable. Voiceofreason01 (talk) 20:25, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree, there isn't enough here to support an article. If additional sources became available, it would be a different story - but there have been 2 years during which something could have been found, and nothing. My own (limited) search reveals nothing at all. So, delete. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 20:50, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - lacking any followup, there's no way that it can be determined whether this is truly notable or not. No coverage for two years suggests it's probably a minor event. Tony Fox (arf!) 21:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - So. Beeblebrox, you and I had a little disagreement when I first started the article and it has been refined and edited while under the Spotlight for several months. This event occured in September of 2007, more than two years prior to today. Suddenly, you feel the urge to delete it? Tell me, are any of you people familiar with the scale of the majority of major UFO sightings? They last for only a few seconds, at best, and rarely occur over a major metropolitan center. The UFO was not sighted over Anchorage, but Kodiak, Alaska and Homer, Alaska. Because there is a such a small population, you, Voiceofreason01, UltraExactZZ and Tony Fox declare that it does not deserve Wikipedia. However, take the scale and match it up with other UFO sightings with articles. Most of them contain similar witness testimonies and similar numbers.


 * Honestly, I cannot discuss this much further as I have progressed past this article and focus mostly upon other Wikipedia articles and more real-world events. Should you delete this article, may I suggest you nominate the other UFO articles for deletion? Assuming that you're naming UFO sightings insignificant, it will be completely understandable. D arth B otto talk•cont 16:43, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't believe anyone is suggesting that all UFO sightings are non-notable, just this one. (see WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS) Frankly this had more or less fallen off my radar a long time ago, then I noticed someone editing it today and decided to see if it had progressed any. It had not. (I don't see the spotlight related improvements you refer to.) I also have yet to see the evidence that anyone in Homer witnessed this. (This would be WP:OR, but I would note that I live in the Homer area and have never heard anyone here mention this) Still only the 1 good source. Not even the Homer News or Anchorage Daily News or even the Peninsula Clarion, who will print just about anything, seemed to feel it was a newsworthy event. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * With respect, DarthBotto, my concern begins and ends with the sourcing. If the event is to have an article, it will need reliable sources. Such sources have not been found. As a result, I recommend that we delete the article. If there are sources, and if they meet our policy requirements, then by all means - keep. I'm saying that I don't see those sources. The size of the community is irrelevant to notability, so long as the coverage is there. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 06:58, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Unless reliable sources can be found to establish notability. Artw (talk) 06:29, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


 * DELETE Wikipedia is not an archive of minor news stories. Not notable.Simonm223 (talk) 18:34, 22 December 2009 (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.