Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wildball


 * 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. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Wildball

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable event lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Appears to be more advertising than encyclopedic article.  ttonyb (talk) 15:50, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - The Event has taken place annually each year since 2007, attracting about ~200 participants and countless spectators and people attending the public parties yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.187.93.35 (talk • contribs) 20:17, 23 January 2011


 * Comment - The Event gained ~1200 Fans + almost as much friends on Facebook since going public on 27th of Dezember 2010, since it was a underground event the last years, mostly known and talked about in the years before. The Articles and News on the Blog are called 15.000 times each week, And the term "wildball rally" is wide known in the scene, due to forums and features in offline print magazines. The article shall not be an advertiesment, but an encyclopedic information for people who are interested in the event and its background. If there are changes required to make the article better, please tell us what to do.''' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.187.93.35 (talk • contribs) 16:39, 23 January 2011


 * Delete - could not find significant coverage by independent reliable sources to establish notability.--70.80.234.196 (talk) 17:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - Why Delete???? There are a couple of articles in print magazines, countless followers through their blog, just type in "wildball rally" at google and you will find plenty of information - mostly by independent people searching for information about the rally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.186.13.24 (talk • contribs) 20:17, 23 January 2011


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Why Deleting? It is an encyclopedic entry about a talked about public event, the relevance must not be determined by its GHits or GNews score but by its relevance for the people! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.79.170.187 (talk • contribs) — 88.79.170.187 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment – Actually this is not about relevance, but Wikipedia based notability. The article fails to demonstrate that notability.  ttonyb (talk) 16:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

*Keep —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.79.170.187 (talk) 10:58, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - No coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 16:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - There actually is plenty coverage which can be found in magazines and blogs. Details can sent to verify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.79.170.187 (talk) 16:56, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: Wikipedia is not for things invented by drunk frat boys on road trips. There are zero G-News hits and zero evidence, as WP:V requires, that ANYone has "talked" about this.  WP:RS requires that sources be reliable, independent, third-party sources with a proven track record for fact checking.  If the keep proponents have sources that Wildball is discussed in "significant detail" in print magazines (blogs almost never count), let's see them. For my part, it's indicative that their Facebook page is dominated with photos not of their event, but of bikini babes, all ganked from another website.   Ravenswing  17:50, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep @Ravenswing: Its not necessary to score out postings saying "keep", just because you have a different opinion, neither to answer in a condiscending way. And, i am not even going to comment your off-topic potshot regarding the facebook-fanpage. ON TOPIC: If wikipedia decides, the article should be deleted, then we won`t complain.
 * All i / we just say is, the article is about an talked about public event, even though in fact not THAT much talked about yet in the online world. -due to it was an underground event for 3 years, although there was mediacoverage, for example a 2page feature in germany`s second largest modified car-mag.
 * There is no doubt that the event held in august 2011 will gain loads of reliable, independent and third-party sourced material in on-, and offline magazines, communities etc. We would be glad if it will be kept, but we wont start crying, if not. Best regards, a bunch of sometimes-drunk-but-always-enjoing-their-great-life boys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scallywags.stephan (talk • contribs) 21:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – It was me (ttonyb), not Ravenswing that stuck-out the votes. I did so with a very good reason.  They are duplicated from the same IP address.  Being talked about is not a reason for inclusion into Wikipedia.  Wikipedia is not about popularity, but rather about  verifiable articles.   Verifiability is what is lacking in this article.  Unless you can provide support for its notability using reliable sources the article will be deleted. If the event does gather adequate media coverage then it can be created at that time.    ttonyb  (talk) 21:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: To expand on Ttonyb's remarks, the core policy of Wikipedia boils down to a basic premise: the world has heard of you. "Underground" events, by their very nature, are out of the public eye, and subjects about whom no one has written in books, magazines, newspapers or other such media do not qualify for articles.  Does that set a high bar for "indie" pop culture events?  Yes, it does: deliberately so.  It isn't helpful that the "official website" has no content, or that according to Network Solutions was created only in October.  If this event has, as has been claimed, written up in German automotive print magazines, we'd be grateful to see the citations.   Ravenswing  23:39, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete The strikethrough was because you are allowed one !vote per poster. Anything more has to be a comment, reply, or sometimes just a sigh! No references complying with WP:RS have been given. Your own site can be used as extra info, but it cannot establish notability. Possibly there are no references that are acceptable here - I just did a quick gsearch and couldn't find any. Over to you.... Peridon (talk) 21:36, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - Okay i see, i did not know how this works on here. i think i can add the magazine features and if that is not enought i will delete the article and set it up once the event gained more notability. Regards, stephan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scallywags.stephan (talk • contribs) 22:39, 24 January 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.