Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Small, local, or niche genre conventions


 * 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.  Sandstein  16:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Small, local, or niche genre conventions

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

Article consists of a list of advertisements for non-notable conventions; list will never be complete. Somno (talk) 01:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.   —Somno (talk) 01:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, you can't make a 'notable' from many 'non-notables.' --Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 *  Keep  as this is a useful incubator for a significant number of articles about science fiction and other conventions. This is not an attempt to list all such conventions (indeed, another article does attempt just such a thing) but a way to keep a series of stubs together in one larger, more useful article until each convention can be spun off to a useful non-stub article. - Dravecky (talk) 02:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's unlikely stubs on the articles would meet notability standards, so as Mr Vernon said, grouping them together won't make a difference. For example, Con-Troll's references are Google groups and personal websites. The other cons are unreferenced, or referenced only to the official site. That does not establish notability. Somno (talk) 04:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If you're wanting to have an incubator for articles, create a project page. However, I think this will take care of itself...  --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 06:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * These are all valid points and will drop my "keep" and substitute a request to copy this to my userspace instead of pure deletion. This will allow me to salvage the remaining convention stubs to create new articles over the next few weeks, if proper sourcing can be found. - Dravecky (talk) 07:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You should copy it to your userspace now in case the closing admin. misses your comment and deletes it before you have a chance to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point. Thanks. - Dravecky (talk) 22:24, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. This may be a lot of things (specifically, a category or a project page), if only it were written as one.  What it is not is an article.  See WP:NOT.  --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 06:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-encyclopedic, poorly sourced content that vios WP:NOT. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:09, 5 August 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.