Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orient Fair


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 19:09, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Orient Fair

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No sources, all text generated by machine translation Furious Style (talk) 02:16, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 April 3.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  02:26, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Poorly written is not grounds for deletion, please see WP:UGLY for arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Secondly, while the article lacks sources, it does not mean they are not out there. If you conduct WP:BEFORE, you will find that the Orient Fair has been covered in several books:    . Also when conducting BEFORE, you should search the hebrew name of the festival as well for more results; Yerid Hamizrach:   . I found most of this in less than 5 minutes. I'm sure looking around even more will net other results. I would also be interested to see other non-English sources which I'm certain there would be more than the English considering the country of the fair.  Mkdw talk 04:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - certainly a Notable event. We know a lot about the 1930s in Europe, but precious little in other parts of the world.   The Artical might be better dealling with all the similar events that decade (Levant fairs) but I don't know what references are available for all of them.   I also agree that the text needs improving, but that is no reason to delete.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 13:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment I've never questioned the notability of the article, only that there is not a single sentence which passes either criteria of 1) that it is sourced, verifiable, 2) that it is in English. Unless someone corrects these problems I will stub the article down to a sentence if it is not deleted. Furious Style (talk) 13:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:53, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment I think that would be a good thing to do, but put a warning on the talk page and give it a month, eh?--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 19:53, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment The article needs a tremendous amount of work, no arguments there. The fact that it's notable and has sources (not in the article but exist) suggests this article could easily be improved is should not be deleted. Mkdw talk 21:18, 3 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Horribly written.  Requires refs.  But they exist.  As long as they exist, and qualify the article for GNG, the fact that they are not in the article, or that the article is horribly written, is no reason to delete.  Even nom admits that the article refs exist and that it is notable.  Thus, it is not a candidate for AfD.  AfD is not for cleanup.  I would suggest nom withdraw his nomination.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:59, 5 April 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.