Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naru 2 U


 * 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. Wizardman 03:40, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Naru 2 U

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

Non-notable convention that has not held it's first event. No reliable third-party source to support the article, as required by WP:V. Prod was disputed by original author. --Farix (Talk) 14:47, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm not sure why this keeps getting marked for deletion. The con's official site is referenced. I've also submitted an entry to AnimeCons.com, which should be up within a week. --AceStarleaf (talk) 15:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Did you not read the reasoning I gave? The convention is not notable and has not held its first event. There are no reliable third-party sources that supports anything in the article or to assert the conventions notability. A single webPAGE with only a date and location can't be used as a source because anyone could have bought the domain and threw that page up. All other anime conventions have well developed sites that provide more then just a date and location. And AnimeCons.com does require more then just a single webpage, but a fully developed site before they add a convention to their list. But even a listing on AnimeCons.com isn't enough to establish notability as that site is an online directory. And let me also add that a Google search for "Naru 2 U" did not bring up a single hit. Not even from a web forum or blog. --Farix (Talk) 16:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Google won't show the site yet as it's not cross linked on any other sites, and the domain itself is only about 2 days old. I have submitted the site to Google already, and a better laid out page is in the works.  I figured a Splash Page with the date and location would be better than the "Under Construction" pages most domain hosts put up for a new domain. --AceStarleaf (talk) 13:06, 25 July 2008 (EST)
 * Comment And you just provided more evidence as to why this convention isn't notable yet. In probably now falls under the speedy deletion criteria. --Farix (Talk) 17:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment If you only just thought this con up yourself, it's too early to make an article about it. Right now, it's nothing more than just advertising, and considering that you kicked the internet advertising into full gear before you'd even finished your own site, one has to doubt whether the con will even happen at all, let alone perform well. Gelmax (talk) 17:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree that the article isn't up to any kind of standards now, but like the nominator acknowledged, it's about an event that hasn't happened yet. In other words, while there may not be any reliable sources now, there will be in a couple of months, and it will almost definitely be notable after it's happened. The question, then, is whether we need to go out of our way to delete an article that'll just be remade again before the end of the year. Since it's already here, per WP:WIP and WP:DEADLINE, I think it's worth taking the long-term view and letting it sit till the news articles show up; it's not like it's a stinking blemish on the perfection of Wikipedia or even just the anime/manga articles, after all. Of course, if this article was clearly going to remain this poor forever or even just for a long period of time, prodding it four hours after its creation would be justified. But anime conventions are considered notable, so it's really just a question of what to do with the article in the four months until it attains official and undeniable notability. Gelmax (talk) 16:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Wikipeida is not a crystal ball. We can't assume that there may be reliable sources in the future. The availability of reliable sources has to be judge on what is presently available. BTW, anime conventions has to pass the notability criteria just like any other topic on Wikipedia. They are not considered notable by default. --Farix (Talk) 16:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Sure, according to a strict reading of policy that's the case, but it doesn't account for WP:IAR. It's guaranteed that any real convention will be reported on by news sites enough to be considered notable, since it a con is in fact a significant event. This isn't about whether the article meets the regulations NOW, but what we should do with it in the time until it does meet regulations. Deletion policies generally don't allow for future improvement and shouldn't be blindly followed in a case like this where future improvement is guaranteed. Besides, the page has been here for less than a day. Quick-draw deletions like this one should be reserved for undebatable, unimprovable trash, which this page isn't. Gelmax (talk) 17:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * There is no guarantee that a convention will receive coverage by a reliable source, and thus establish notability. I'm not sure where you are getting that from. --Farix (Talk) 18:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipeida is not a crystal ball. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 17:54, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Yesh, if you guys want to be this Draconian about it then delete it. I will be re-posting it on Nov 16th after it meets the missing Notability Criteria your complaining about.--AceStarleaf (talk) 18:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: It's not about being draconian, as you put it. We have Notability guidelines and deletion policies that reference them for a reason. If this becomes notable on Nov 16th (by meeting the guidelines for notability-- not just for having happened), then certainly repost it. Cheers! --Storkk (talk) 18:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per TheFarix's reply to AceStarleaf at top of discussion: This is certainly not WP:Notable. It may become notable in the future, and this article can be recreated if it ever does. --Storkk (talk) 18:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment... i've removed the speedy template, as an admin here can easily speedy if they see fit. Shouldn't be both speedy and AfD. --Storkk (talk) 18:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete without prejudice to recreation once RS are published. Jclemens (talk) 19:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete once it happens and people write about it, it can have an article. Until then the people trying to get this kept should familiarize themselves with why we don't have articles on stuff that has not happened yet. JuJube (talk) 13:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Deltete per WP:ORG. Shiroi Hane (talk) 17:52, 30 July 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.