Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Washington State Mathematics Championship


 * 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. Wizardman 16:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Washington State Mathematics Championship

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

Non-notable school event on a local level. I'm sure each state has something like this, and it doesn't seem to have any notability. One Google hit for "washington state mathematics championship," 113 for "washington state math championship." either way (talk) 02:22, 23 April 2009 (UTC) 
 * Keep To be serious, I laughed when I saw this. Local level?  The entire state isn't a local level.  In addition, this isn't a school event.  Over 1000 of selected students from schools across Washington compete here, just in the middle school level.  Of course it's notable; this is almost as notable as MathCounts.   -  down  load  |   sign!  02:26, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: I've actually found that there are much more than 1000 students participating at this contest.  -  down  load  |   sign!  22:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Your state is local as compared to an entire nation. There are hundreds of conferences and competitions that take place through high schools and middle schools every year.  Not all of them deserve articles, and I don't see this one being any different.  Do you have any sources that say it's notable? And this is nowhere near the notability of Mathcounts as Mathcounts serves the entire nation with the winners being recognized by the White House.  either way (talk) 02:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You are mistaken; this is the main mathematics competition of Washington state. This competition is even listed in the Art of Problem Solving directory.     -  down  load  |   sign!  02:34, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, along with how many others? It looks to be over one hundred different competitions there.  And, no, I'm not mistaken, I realize what iti is.  It's a statewide competition, which isn't notable.  Nationwide competitions are notable; statewide competitions are not.  The Scripps National Spelling Bee is notable.  The Kentucky State Spelling Bee is not.  either way (talk) 02:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That is your point of view. All of the competitions listed at List of United States regional mathematics competitions should have articles.   -  down  load  |   sign!  01:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * And that's your view point that they should have articles. But, outside the state, they're not notable.  Even within the state they're not.  either way (talk) 02:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Neither of you is correct. Notability is not subjective.  Notability is in-depth coverage in multiple independent sources published by people with good reputations for fact checking and accuracy.  Neither of you are putting our policies and guidelines into practice.  Neither of you have arguments that have bases in those policies and guidelines.  Look for sources.  Base your arguments on what sources you find, and (if you find some) their depths and their provenances.  Sources! Sources! Sources! Uncle G (talk) 10:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * How do you know that they are not notable in the state? Math Champion (talk) 00:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Because I don't see any sources that say it is notable. either way (talk) 01:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly what I was trying to say. Based on either way's logic, Seattle Marathon and many others could be deleted.  Seattle Marathon doesn't even have any sources.   -  down  load  |   sign!  01:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You are conflating the existence of sources with the citation of sources. Articles are eligible for deletion if sources don't exist, not merely if they aren't cited in the article.  The task here is to show that sources exist for this subject, by citing them, to prove that an article can be written using them.  It is not to make the long-since-debunked and completely fallacious "If article X, then article Y." argument.  Stop the arguments that aren't based upon deletion policy, and that won't help the closing administrator one whit, and start looking for sources.  Sources! Sources! Sources! Uncle G (talk) 04:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * If you look on the list of math competitions in the U.S., many are regional/state competitions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Math Champion (talk • contribs) 02:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as an unnotable competition. There are many statewide competitions.  M C  10  |  Sign here!  03:02, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. In the competitions in te U.S. list, almost every state is on there. Washington is one of the states that is missing. Many of the competitions in the list are also regional/state competitions, and this competition is very notable in Washington state. There aren't very many other notable competitions in WA.--Math Champion (talk) 02:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * "almost every state is on there"? Looking at List of United States regional mathematics competitions, there are very few articles, and a large amount of red links.  And there shouldn't be.
 * Well, now that i've added some content, I think we should keep it.--Math Champion (talk) 02:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * What kind of content have you added that shows notability through independent, third party sources? either way (talk) 02:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I WILL add some content, just not yet. --Math Champion (talk) 03:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Why not? In order for an article to be kept, it needs to have that kind of content in there.  either way (talk) 03:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Right now I don't have the time. Could you wait a week? Then if there is still no content, I approve the deletion. download or I will add some content to the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Math Champion (talk • contribs) 03:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete (or Userfy until notability can be established.) — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 05:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I hit the Wikipedia page when looking for info via Google today, it's relatively new and needs some time to settle in, but it's certainly not a waste. 07:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.162.161 (talk) — 64.81.162.161 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 03:28, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete To those arguing that similar competitions are mentioned in list articles: Notability doesn't apply to mentions in the contents of articles, such as lists. It does apply when deciding whether to have a separate article for something, and it's a higher standard than the standard for inclusion as a mention in the content of an article, which is only verifiability rather than both notability and verifiability that is required for a separate article. Gigs (talk) 04:13, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into Blaine High School (Washington). The subject is not notable enough to warrant a standalone article. However, the competition seems to be very important in the context of the school. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:39, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Your suggestion will not work, as Blaine High School nor the Blaine School District has an major affiliation with this contest, other than providing the space. This competition is also hosted by Conoco Phillips, but a merge into that article will also be futile.   -  down  load  |   sign!  19:15, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment This is NOT a ballot and the determination is according to guidelines, not number of "votes", this is not a vote. If the subject of the article satisfies guidelines for notability and verifiability, it stays, if not, it is deleted. Drawn Some (talk) 04:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no indication of any possible notability. subnational level competitions of his sort are not notable under most circumstances, unless there is very clear sourcing to indicate something particularly important. DGG (talk) 05:13, 1 May 2009 (UTC).
 * Delete. No independent sources have been provided. There are no Google News hits and hardly any Google web hits. Hence, notability has not been established. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The second source,, is a reliable and independent source.  -  down  load  |   sign!  00:41, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * But it doesn't express notability, only existence. either way (talk) 02:53, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The general notability guideline states that "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." I'd be glad to userfy this article until I or someone else is capable of finding the sources.  However, there is no question whether this contest is notable.  This is not one of the many local competitions in Washington nor a mere school event.   -  down  load  |   sign!  03:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, as I'm seeing a lot of logical fallacies regarding votes to keep, but no verifiable evidence of notability. It's easy to say "If article X is still on Wikipedia, than this should be too." But that isn't how this works. Not every article is the same, and as someone else has made mention of, there is a difference between not being cited properly, and not being notable. In the case of the former, verifiability can easily be established with some edits and proper citation. In the latter, it's not going to change if there's still no reliable 3rd party coverage to establish that it is notable in an encyclopedic format. No one here is disputing that this math competition is important to the participants, as that much is obvious. But importance to a select few are not what makes this relevant to anyone outside of the article's immediate scope. JogCon (talk) 11:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - fails Notability because it is not notable enough in the context of a school event, and Reliable sources because none of this article is sourced. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * As I said, this is not a school event. This is event is only hosted by the Blaine School District.   -  down  load  |   sign!  21:42, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:33, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Involves enough people to be considered notable. JamesMLane t c 12:31, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * How many does it involve? That's not mentioned in the article.  What is the minimum standard for number of people involved to be considered notable?  either way (talk) 12:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * This year's contest involved over 4000 mathletes total in high school and middle school levels, and these are top mathletes selected from each school district, so it should be considered notable. Notability is not quanitified; however, this meets the standards of having enough coverage.   -  down  load  |   sign!  19:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Where are the third-party, reliable sources that prove this? Cunard (talk) 22:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * This is the problem I'm having. Because of today's popular culture, one can hardly find any sources regarding this topic, but can find sources on thousands of bands with hardly any skill at all.  Are these bands really that much more notable than this math competition?  Back to the point: I am working to find third party sources, so if this ends up getting deleted I'll userfy the article.   -  down  load  |   sign!  23:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "this meets the standards of having enough coverage" You say this over and over, yet, there is no coverage shown anywhere.  The only two references prove existence, not notability.  Having the name of the event on the list of about 50 state competitions for mathematics does not count as "coverage."  either way (talk) 01:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per the lack of reliable sources. The sources mentioned are passing mentions. The championship is listed in several directories - this does not confirm any notability. Remember, existence does not prove notability. Cunard (talk) 22:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, as there are no reliable sources that document this event in detail. None of the "Keep" !votes above have really addressed this point to my satisfaction.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC).
 * Regretful Delete The problem is not notability. The problem is verifiability. If we can verify the claims regarding attendance and the like, I'd support keeping in a heartbeat. My problem is that searching Google and Gnews have failed to produce sources that can verify. I support userfication upon deletion and no prejudice against recreation should such sources materialize. Ray  Talk 03:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Insufficient notability and reliable sources. Reywas92 Talk  21:03, 5 May 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.