Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edinburgh 2008

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 all. Pigman☿ 07:29, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edinburgh 2008

Edinburgh 2008 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Reads like a flyer for a forthcoming conference. May or may not be notable in due course - violates WP:CRYSTAL at present. Suggest merging into one of the many articles related to the Orthodontic Technicians Association. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 18:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. Organizations hold conferences, this is expected and not normally notable. --Dhartung | Talk 18:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
• Comment - there's a whole bunch of these recently created in Cat:Orthodontic Technicians Association Conferences, all of which could (and probably should) be easily merged into a one-page article. It might be worth adding them here, too. Grutness...wha? 01:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Yes, please. --Dhartung | Talk 05:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Okay - see below. Grutness...wha? 08:41, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A handful of similar articles

Orthodontic Technicians Association Conference 2002 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Orthodontic Technicians Association Conference 2003 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Orthodontic Technicians Association Conference 2004 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Orthodontic Technicians Association Conference 2005 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Orthodontic Technicians Association Conference 2006 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Orthodontic Technicians Association Conference 2007 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

• These can - and should - all be deleted - almost all the information is already listed at Orthodontic Technicians Association Conference in the form of a handy, easy-to-read table - anyone searching for information about a particular year is as likely to visit the main conference article anyway. As pointed out by Dhartung, above, loads of organisations hold annual conferences, and an association which apparently has a fairly small membership (312, according to the parent article) and of limited notability certainly doesn't need separate articles for each of its its annual conferences. A camparison could be drawn with the likes of the English Royal College of Surgeons, which has been around slightly longer than the OTA (nearer 370 years than 37), has a considerably larger membership, and is far more widely known. Wikipedia does not have separate articles for its annual conferences. BTW, each and every one of these articles carries the association's copyrighted logo as part of the article - a big no-no. Grutness...wha? 08:41, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

• Note The above Orthodontic Technicians Association Conference "articles" have since been redirected to Orthodontic Technicians Association Conference, which would therefore seem to be outside of the scope of this AfD. ➔ REDVEЯS says: at the third stroke the time will be 19:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete All - I also suspected some other articles in this template should be deleted too. D.M.N. (talk) 11:26, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete all per nom. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 12:29, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete all of them, as above. Axl (talk) 19:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete all. Barely notable, advertising and poorly named. They merit nothing more than a mention on the organisation's page. The page itself is prominently linked on their web page [1], as if they don't provide the same information there, so it all looks very like an exercise in vanity publishing and advertising. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 19:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
• As one of the author's of the OTA pages, I am happy for the individual conference pages to be deleted and would like to apologise for any offence caused by creating these articles. I was unaware that there was limits on pages that could be created. I will change the excess pages into redirect pages as I don't know how to delete them.

No offence taken, really. You should perhaps read Wikipedia's page on contributing your first article for an introduction. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 20:43, 8 January 2008 (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.