Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naked in the House

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 delete --slakr\ talk / 11:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Naked in the House

Naked in the House (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Delete Google news has no hit[1] fails WP:N. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 16:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Response: I am confused why this page has been marked for deletion... because it doesn't appear in Google News? Notably, the Google News site for India. What criteria is that?! Am I misunderstanding something?

Having now reviewed portions of Wikipedia's deletion policy and what "does not belong", my personal opinion is that this page belongs in Wikipedia as it serves as a record of an ongoing public event that garners attention in the media, is organized and participated in by a number of highly respected photographers as well as amateurs, and the photographs taken for the event / competition are generally considered to be very tasteful and highly artistic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdavidson (talk • contribs) 16:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Response: I appreciate the point about promoting an event. My personal view on NITH is that it is a respected cultural event and exercise in art and photography that deserves to be documented. For what it's worth, that I am not involved in, do not compete in (it's by invitation only), nor do I benefit from the event. Sporting events are often added to Wikipedia, and I don't really see how reporting on past events is any different. Goodness knows that major sporting events are profit centers, the promotion of which I could see as being objectionable, whereas my understanding is any procedes from the NITH exhibition are (in part?) donated to charity. That's subject to verification -- again, I'm not involved. I'm just an admirer of the concept and the work of the photographers involved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdavidson (talk • contribs) 18:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Needs external links to prove notability, otherwise Delete Alberon (talk) 11:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom & Alberon. The external links in the article go to the various entrants in past events, which - while interesting - does nothing to show that the event has received reliable, independent coverage in news articles or other reliable sources. This is an article about the event, so we need information that shows that the event itself is notable. The fact that there were contestants is obvious, since it appears to be a contest of some sort, but that does not mean that the event is notable in itself. To put it another way, would the event be notable no matter who participated? The focus, then, needs to be on the event. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 13:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, appears thoroughly non-notable, like an advert; add it to WP:DAFT.-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 15:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Response: I thought of this page as a work in progress... I would like to add more information to it... but in light of the above, I frankly have nothing to gain by arguing further. Go ahead and delete. I never imagined that creating a Wikipedia page would be so disheartening. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdavidson (talk • contribs) 03:30, 25 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.