Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiwiburn
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. John254 01:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Kiwiburn
Another regional offshoot event of Burning Man, this one Kiwi style. Not notable in its own right, no independent reliable sources to verify anything in the article. The most notable thing about this one is apparently that the burn almost blowed up real good. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 06:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep; with added references now meets relevant notability guidelines.— JEREMY 08:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Comment: I don't think so. Two refs are only announcements of the event to come, and do nothing at all to establish notability. Another talks more about the original Burning Man, and only mentions the NZ event in passing. I don't think these refs do the job, and the Youtube clip is not a reliable source. The radio interview is the only think that comes close. I maintain my position on this article. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 10:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- The announcements simply reference the event names; stuff.co.nz (a valid secondary source) verifies the event (as does the radio interview on 95bfm) and specifically references the theme camp's title. — JEREMY 11:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- WP:V and WP:N are two different things. The sources seem to pass WP:V, but not WP:N. TJ Spyke` —Preceding comment was added at 12:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- So is that a vote one way or another, TJ? - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- WP:V and WP:N are two different things. The sources seem to pass WP:V, but not WP:N. TJ Spyke` —Preceding comment was added at 12:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- The announcements simply reference the event names; stuff.co.nz (a valid secondary source) verifies the event (as does the radio interview on 95bfm) and specifically references the theme camp's title. — JEREMY 11:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- Keep The sources satisfy reliability IMHO (stuff.co.nz is a fairfax portal, and the radio station etc) Fosnez (talk) 10:49, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep As per Fosnez, the sources are established NZ media. (The stuff article was carried in the Dominion Post and Waikato Times printed editions. bFM is the largest alternative radio station in NZ with 100,000 listeners). Kiwiburn is the 2nd largest overseas BM-inspired event. 200 people in an NZ context is equivalent to 15,000 in the US (75x the population) so to delete would be US-centric. richdrich —Preceding comment was added at 02:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- Comment: That's one of the more bizarre arguments I've ever heard for keeping an article. There's no meaningful rationale whatsoever for comparing population sizes to prove notability. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- O RLY?— JEREMY 06:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- And your point is...??? - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 06:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- O RLY?— JEREMY 06:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Um... any chance of getting back on-topic, folks? Keep. The sources are legit ones, and as pointed out Stuff and bFM are both big enough sources to be regarded as passing the required levels. When you add to that that Stuff was relaying a story from the Dominion-Post, one of the country's three biggest newspapers, and I think you have the notability you need for an article. Grutness...wha? 00:09, 22 February 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.
