Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Setsucon


 * 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, speedy keep argument is invalid. --Core desat 04:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Setsucon

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Disputed prod. Original reason was that there were no secondary sources available beyond directory listings. Fails WP:ORG and WP:NOTE. The original author, who also has a COI problem, admits on the talk page that the only sources is a booklet published by the convention. --Farix (Talk) 11:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Conditional delete - if there are no reliable, verifiable third party sources or coverage beyond the pamphlet the organization publishes, then it should be deleted. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 18:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions.   —  Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 18:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - looks like the results I get are forums, listings, more forums, and nothing concrete that would be a reliable source to indicate notability. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Question: Hey everyone; just wondering, if this article ends up being deleted and it turns out that after 2008's convention, more reliable sources are published (not just the booklet again), is it permissible to re-create the entry once again? PlasmaFire3000 05:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep: I believe that persons in the know, who are familiar with the topic, and who are willing to commit time to the article in question should be given at least two weeks (14 days) to answer to the challenges being placed upon the article.  Alternatively, if the article still gets voted to deletion, might it be more properly placed on WikiNews?  --Godfoster 06:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Nothing prevents the article from being improved to deal with the problems brought up during AFD while the AFD is still ongoing. But we also don't keep articles because their subjects could be notable in the future (WP:NOT). --Farix (Talk) 12:31, 23 August 2007 (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.