Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mazarae


 * 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. Despite the pleas of the article creator, there is clear consensus here to delete. If Mazarae grows then certainly it may be eligible for inclusion at a later date; See WP:TOOSOON. KaisaL (talk) 15:54, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Mazarae

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable, no evidence of notability. Also promotional and COI issues, but while those can be fixed/dealt with it’s still not notable. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 23:50, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree with nominator that this article does not meet our notability guideline yet. DeVerm (talk) 22:34, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't delete. I don't agree with nominator that the Mazarae article is promotional, the side doesn't want to make promotion, it just wants to inform people (that are interested into mathematics) that somebody has created a new form of a riddle which is a great development in mathematics. The riddle was a really notable invention in Schaffhausen and in the immediate vicinity. Since 2015 Mazarae is published regularly in two newspapers, as you can see: "Thaynger Anzeiger" and also in the "Neuhauser Woche" which has more than thousands of readers and participants which are trying to solve this new form of a riddle! Tell me, what I have to complement, that there are no guideline problems anymore. (Hanspeterleupp (talk))  —Preceding undated comment added 16:20, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The guideline on notability is here: WP:Notability. See in particular the General Notability Guideline which describes what’s expected for notability in concise terms, with links to other pages that offer more detail on each point.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 17:05, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I made some new changes to make the notability more visible for readers of the article. Is it more obvious now? Hanspeterleupp (talk)] —Preceding undated comment added 20:55, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I've been reading everything and I saw that the guidelines ask for sources, especially for the secondarys. I think that the Mazarae article is based on the website www.mazarae.ch, also based on the German Wikipedia page called Mazarä as you can see in the References. In addition Mazarae is monthly published in two different newspapers, which should also show the notability enough.
 * But none of the sources satisfies the General Notability Guideline. That in one sentence says
 * "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list."
 * Of the sources in the article only one mentions the topic, mazarae.ch, and that is not reliable source.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 23:19, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete for now. Perhaps in the future, if this form of puzzle starts gaining widespread popularity, the article can be recreated.  But for now, it is limited to appearing in two very local newspapers, and has no real third party sources showing that it has garnered any sort of recognition beyond that.64.183.45.226 (talk) 18:25, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as still too new obviously and my own searches have found nothing better at all. SwisterTwister   talk  19:20, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete This is WP:TOOSOON. At the moment it seems to have limited popularity and there is no indication that it will definitely become popular or notable in the future. Delete for now, but no prejudice to recreating it later in the future when it has actually become notable. That would require more secondary and independent sources to actually talk about the puzzle. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 05:55, 2 July 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.