Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mapic

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 --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mapic

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

This appears to be a non-notable trade show but admit to having little experience in judging these for Wikipedia. I don't have an opinion either way. Perhaps it only needs more WP:RS. Pig^man 17:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Delete just another trade show, nothing notable. The Rambling Man 06:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I dont agree, I know the show and am in the industry. There are almost 9000 global participants, and it is acknowledged to be an extremely important networking enviroment in the industry, and it is growing fast. Regarding it reading like an advert, I am no real expert on that but I guess it is hard for it not to. Note on the history that the author was specifically asked to "demonstrate notability" which I guess is not easy to do without giving it a "boost". In my opinion an important page and should stay. Laows 07:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment - first off, notability is a prerequisite - see WP:N. Secondly, it must not read like an advert, regardless of what it's describing. It must be pruned down to ensure it's not just disguised spam. The Rambling Man 20:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment - Please see this list of trade shows that take place annually in Cannes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannes_Film_Festival#Other_Cannes_Congresses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Viv McCourt (talk • contribs) 15:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment - you mean look at the list you added of non-notable congress shows? The Rambling Man 07:12, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment - Define notable. This congress is most certainly notable to the 9000 attendees. How many directly interested people would constitute "noteable", please? Presumably the Cannes film Festival, which is the focus of the page user Viv McCourt suggested for reference is "notable". It has 29 000 registred delegates. So where between 9000 and 29 000 is they line, please? Laows 07:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment WP:N is the policy on notabillity, but moreover, any kind of notability must be verifiable using reliable sources. I see absolutely no evidence of such. The Rambling Man 07:55, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment As the author, I will try to improve on this in terms of verifcation. The reason I have not is that when I did in the first writing, it was flagged as "written as an advert". Most of the sources are official sources which eminate from the organisers of the congress. I will try though. There are literally 10's of thousands of articles in this site wbhich are less notable, worse written and with no verification. I am suprised this one is singled out. KnightStrider 16:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment Okay, I have updated and cited sources and references where possible, and where I the information has been gathered verbally and I am unable to provide a direct link to source I have deleted or re-written the reference. I trust this is okay now? KnightStrider 16:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Very Weak Keep The article still looks like a fluff piece produced by their PR department. If that isn't fixed, then delete it. Article needs a major rewrite. Going by sources not in the article, it looks like one of the major trade shows in its industry.jonathon 18:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletions. -- Gavin Collins 09:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete although this is an international real estate related trade show, and their of lots of ghits promoting the event by its promoters and exhibitors, I cannot find any reliable secondary sources as evidence of notability. There is a similar event, MIPIM, and although MAPIC is different, it is not unique. Notability to come.--Gavin Collins 10:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment Actually the MIPIM Congress is general Real Estate, and this MAPIC congress is specific to Commercial Real Estate. You know, go ahead and delete for all I care. There are 9000 delegates to this congress, this page is already ranked 9 at Google.com and it is a well trafficked resource. I am an attendee to this Tradeshow for 6 years, and have tried to put useful information out here as is the purpose of this site. If you think it is not useful to have an overview/ official links and suchlike for a group of 9000 professionals then just go ahead and delete it. I am sorry I bothered trying to contribute something to this project. KnightStrider 14:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

• Keep but rewrite. Has anyone bothered looking for sources? It is mentioned in major sources throughout the world (166 relevant Google News hits[1]), including Arab News[2], the Moscow Times[3], Il Denaro from Italy[4], ... While this gets a lot less media attention than e.g. MIDEM due to real estate being slightly less sexy than pop music, it is clearly an important event, recognised by independent, reliable, international media (and I haven't even searched in professional real estate magazines and the like). Fram 14:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Fram and others. A trade show with 9,000 participants is almost notable by definition. It's going to get a lot of press, and people all over the world want to know about it if 9,000 people care enough to actually travel great distances attend - hence, encyclopedic. That seems to be borne out by the coverage. People know about this show, and they want to know about this show. Wikidemo 19:58, 1 November 2007 (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.