Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northern Lights (strain)

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 No Consensus, disagreement over whether it is notable and if the sources found are sufficient. Suggest sources mentioned in this discussion are added to the article. Davewild (talk) 10:08, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Northern Lights (strain)

Northern Lights (strain) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

unsourced and non-notable strain of cannabis -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 17:00, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete Coccyx Bloccyx 19:45, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and rename to Northern Lights (marijuana) or another title more consistent with related articles. Expand and cite as reliable sources are found. Winner of the Cannabis Cup and other (probably less notable) awards; one of the most notable strains of marijuana, and probably one of the more noted strains of any plant. Barno 21:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Barno I am not aware of what awards this has won but if you have some credible sources on the matter I will change my vote. Coccyx Bloccyx 22:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Google search shows lots of user-submitted content, with plenty of samples that directly reference winning the Cup, but no reliable sources that I know. Until the inquiry up above draws reliable sources, the best I know is HIGH TIMES magazine which has (so I'm told) printed centerfold features on Northern Lights and White Widow, as well as a feature article each year on the competition and awards. Barno 01:09, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom due to lack of reliable sources published about the subject. RFerreira (talk) 21:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BLACKKITE 23:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Burn it for lacking reliable sources to verify its existance. Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 23:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, source, and cleanup. A Google News search yields plenty of high quality secondary sources for this ([1] [2] [3] [4] [5]). Low quality sources also indicate it's a significant variety. • Gene93k (talk) 00:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - as with most of the cannabis articles, it has no reputable sources whatsoever. -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 09:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

keep as per Gene93k  The Steve  11:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep per Gene93k. Orphic (talk) 06:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. There are verifiable assertions of notability, and sourcing is grounds for good revision, not deletion. Bacchiad (talk) 23:47, 14 December 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.