Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gannon Award


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 15:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

The Gannon Award

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Many other Gannon awards can be found; the Archbishop Gannon Award, the Steve Gannon Award, the Marie E. Gannon Award, and the Terry Gannon Award. But this Gannon award has only 14 Google hits. Abductive  (reasoning) 17:08, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - no coverage in reliable sources. References provided in the article are not reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 16:23, 2 November 2009 (UTC)


 * There is an entry at the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford celebrating the fact that Nick Bostrom received the award (http://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/archive/2009/eugene_r._gannon_award_for_the_continued_pursuit_of_human_advancement). It looks like a perfectly legitimate award regardless of how many hits it has on google. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.199.208 (talk) 01:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oxford's website cannot be considered independent from Dr. Bostrom, since he is in their employ. Abductive  (reasoning) 01:51, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:04, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Retitle to specify, and make necessary articles and disam pages for the others. It's hard to judge the notability of a new award, but it can be inferred from the nature of the awardees. This is not inherited notability, for people at this level wouldnt have accepted it if they hadnt thought it significant. Article needs clarification.  Oxford's website can be considered reliable for routine facts about its faculty.     DGG ( talk ) 00:09, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No secondary sources exist to tell us anything about this award. Are you familiar with how squirrely the Transhumanists are? Abductive  (reasoning) 02:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The OU souce is in my opinion such a source. I agree additional information would help, and if by squirrely you mean that there are a number of rather low grade articles about them here, yes, I think we do have some here. But each must be judged independently, without prejudice about the type of organization involved.   DGG ( talk ) 03:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. No question on the reliability of material.  Awarded is clearly notable.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:03, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This award has only been given to one person, and his employer mentions it on their website. It has generated no news reports, it is not mentioned in any books, and has less than 20 Google hits total. The person awarded has a Wikipedia article, true, and Oxford is an important place, but notability is not inherited. Abductive  (reasoning) 15:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. It's not even mentioned in a single secondary reliable source. I don't understand how anyone could argue that this topic is notable, we don't build articles out of press releases and puff pieces on university websites. Fences  &amp;  Windows  21:21, 6 November 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.