Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QUANTA (competition)


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:09, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

QUANTA (competition)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article was proposed for deletion in 2007; the PROD was removed without a rationale. It was then re-PROD'ed a couple days ago, with the PROD removed on the technicality that a page can't be PROD'ed twice. It's been tagged as needing sources since 2012. I was unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources to improve it (a smattering of press-release-level stuff isn't enough), so I'm bringing it here. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 14:15, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 14:17, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 14:17, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - Competition article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. A search turned up no significant WP:RS coverage of this competition.Dialectric (talk) 14:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - I hate to proceed without being 100% confident this topic is not notable, but I can't find any good sources either and the current content is bad/not worth saving so no real regrets there. If someone wants to come around later and write a better encyclopedic article on this competition, which clearly demonstrates notability, I would be happy for the page to be re-created. Input from anyone who is familiar with children's STEM competitions in India? do we have a bigger page this can be mentioned as one example in? Caleb Stanford (talk) 15:51, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. This falls under WP:NORG and we don't have the multiple in-depth independent non-local reliable sources demanded by that notability standard. In fact we have no sources at all, merely an external link to the contest web site, which is totally inadequate as a source. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:40, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yes, it clearly fails WP:NORG. My very best wishes (talk) 21:55, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find any significant coverage from independent reliable sources in my own search (I only found a few non-RS posts like this and this) and none have been found by anyone else, so this probably fails WP:NORG. — MarkH21talk 09:22, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: No significant coverage. Behind the moors (talk) 12:26, 17 November 2021 (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.