Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SyFy Genre 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   delete. -- Ged UK  11:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

SyFy Genre Awards

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

List of awards by a no-longer existent web site; the award criteria and notability was tenuous at best; plus the article was initiated by the website's (former) owner, so it has the appearance of self-promotion. --- HidariMigi (talk) 20:32, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete. Article is a about web-page, no assertion of notability at all, so I'd argue it just qualifies as an A7. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 20:43, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and merge smerge to Airlock Alpha. SyFy is a legitimate genre (Stuart Elliott, "Confused by Sci Fi Name? Can 'Syfy' Clarify?", The New York Times, 16 March 2009, p. 7) and these awards are mentioned in several notable reviews from 2004/2005. Ottre 21:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, agree with that, merge. Not fully convinced the awards are sufficiently notable to include the whole list on Wikipedia (you can always have a link to the list on the proper website), but that's a discussion for the Airlock Alpha page. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 21:18, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Also agree with that. Ottre 21:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: IMHO, a merge isn't appropriate because such an extensive list is far beyond the scope of the article Airlock Alpha, where a short description of the "award" might serve all that's needed. Many, many web fan-oriented sites give awards. These particular "awards" are virtual-- no one actually gets anything-- and they're based on website visitors voting on nominees. If anything, they're an unscientific poll of how many times fans can stuff ballots. So, if the list by itself isn't notable, then it's not going to be made more so by being copied into another article. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.--HidariMigi (talk) 00:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - I did a massive clean-up of this article in the last few days - it was full of self-important puffery and primary sources originally. Addressing the points above about reviews (made with no attribution or references, BTW), I can find no notable reviews of these awardsfrom any year, much less 2004/2005. A Google news search on the term turns up no major independent reliable sources - of the 172 listed, roughly 90% of the returns of that search are from SyFy Portal itself, and the rest appear to be blogs and fansites linking right back to SyFy Portal. A regular Google search brings back, again, mostly blog, fansite, and forum posts. In fact, in the first 20 pages of returns on that search, I couldn't find a single major reliable source. While the parent site has some minor notability now due to the SciFi Channel's rebranding, I'm not sure that these awards do. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: that may change in the near future. The article I mentioned above which broke the story hasn't been published on-line yet, and a PressDisplay search turns up 16 articles from the last couple days. Maybe we should extended-relist? Ottre 21:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:N, WP:V/WP:RS, WP:NOT, etc. -- samj in out 16:28, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete low notability, and very little in the way of sources except for their own site. Certainly not widely recognised or cared about the way Hugo awards are. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  23:03, 21 March 2009 (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.