Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seven wonders of Romania


 * 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. NW ( Talk ) 22:01, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Seven wonders of Romania

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This list is purely the result of a publicity campaign by a single newspaper. No other reliable source has covered the topic, and I don't think we should, either. Biruitorul Talk 13:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC)


 *  Weak Keep - Running a Google search of "7 minuni naturale ale României" returns a fairly impressive list of results, indicating that while the list might have started out with a 2008 newspaper poll, it has gained traction within Romania and is worthy of documentation with a Wikipedia article. Bear in mind that the article as it currently sits is a bit of a disaster; that's not what we're debating here, however, only whether the topic is worth of inclusion. This from Pictures of Romania.com:"The Seven Natural Wonders of Romania (Romanian: Cele Şapte Minuni Naturale ale României) are the top natural wonders of Romania, which were chosen in a publically held contest held in July, 2008 (with over 60,000 votes). This contest was organised by the "Evenimentul Zilei" newspaper in 2008. Its aim was to show Romanians how many different beautiful places they have." Carrite (talk) 15:53, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Further note: Over 6100 Google hits for the specific phrase "Cele Şapte Minuni Naturale ale României." Carrite (talk) 15:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * For one, Pictures of Romania.com is, as they tell us, a self-published site, and thus cannot be used to validate information on this encyclopedia, which relies on "reliable, published sources" (WP:RS). For another, rather than throwing out Google numbers, could you please point to "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" &mdash; preferably not from the Evenimentul Zilei website? Let's have some specifics from that "fairly impressive list of results". - Biruitorul Talk 17:07, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * When a specific phrase in Romanian returns 6100 results, it's much bigger than "a publicity campaign by a single newspaper." If sourcing is currently imperfect, then flag for more sources. Carrite (talk) 20:59, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Do see WP:GHITS ("a large number of hits on a search engine is no guarantee that the subject is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia") and WP:GNG ("If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article"). Now, can you please point to any such reliable source? Until you do, notability is not demonstrated.
 * And by the way, what search did you perform? For "7 minuni naturale ale României" I get 22 hits; for "Cele Şapte Minuni Naturale ale României", 19 hits. - Biruitorul Talk 22:43, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions.  --  Jujutacular  talk 17:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete So, some people have voted in a poll on what the Seven wonders of Romania are? If it is not officially recorded in some medium other than a general consensus, then it is not notable.  WackyWace  converse 15:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete using google not google news in not the right way to search as per WP:GHITS. insufficient coverage. LibStar (talk) 04:59, 16 September 2010 (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.