Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stella Awards


 * 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   no consensus.  Sandstein  06:51, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Stella Awards

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable "awards", actually a name coined by a comedian and used by him in internet postings and a book. Sergeant Cribb (talk) 17:18, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, the case that inspired the award. The awards to get mentioned in reliable sources but generally in the context of "let's look at this year's winners" types of stories, but it's also mentioned enough in textbooks that a section within the lawsuit article is appropriate. Harley Hudson (talk) 20:21, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * keep even just mentioning the year's winners in reliable sources counts as notability for an award. They've been mentioned on TV, on major news aggrigator sites and in print. HominidMachinae (talk) 20:43, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * "Mention" and "significant coverage" don't seem to be synomymous. Sergeant Cribb (talk) 21:00, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Click the Google news archive search at the top of this AFD. Look at how many places this is covered?  Here is a good example. The Telegraph-Herald - Dec 24, 1997   D r e a m Focus  20:47, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Funnily enough I did trouble myself to look at some of those links. Most of them use the phrase as a shorthand for "list of ridiculous law suits".  There appear to be essentially no information about the awards themselves beyond the fact that they are issued by a particular comedian.  Sergeant Cribb (talk) 20:53, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Doesn't the article I link to, from a major newspaper, give ample coverage of the award?  D r e a m Focus  20:54, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And what exactly does it tell us about the awards beyond rehashing the press release? Is this supposed to be significant independent coverage?  Sergeant Cribb (talk) 20:59, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Seems like significant coverage to me.  D r e a m Focus  21:03, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Note User:Harley Hudson has been blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Otto4711 Jclemens (talk) 05:24, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep It looks to me like this passes the WP:GNG. I added some sources to the article, a couple of which appear to be about the awards rather than simply mentioning them: Qrsdogg (talk) 00:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep because it has significant coverage in independent media.--ᑲᓇᑕᒥ (talk) 16:33, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Lacks notability, lacks reliable 3rd party references, also has a minor NPOV issue--0pen$0urce (talk) 08:13, 29 June 2011 (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.