Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tokonatsu
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. This was relisted again because I was a little unsure about closing the debate with three delete arguments and a lengthy discussion on one of them, but it seems doubtful there will be any new arguments. --Coredesat 23:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Tokonatsu
Another non-notable anime convention. :: Colin Keigher (Talk) 08:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete A Google search doesn't turn up any reliable third-party sources, beyond AnimeCons.com, that are needed to write an article from. --Farix (Talk) 13:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete This con used to be called Wildercon in 2003 and 2004. If the article isn't going to be complete enough to mention that (and perhaps more of the history about it) then I just don't see anything notable here that makes it stand out. --PatrickD 18:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: If you knew that, why didn't you edit the article and make note of that? Everyone can edit articles here, so making this kind of comment without doing something about it is a little absurd, IMHO. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Two reasons: 1) I hadn't seen the article before I learned of the AfD, 2) That one fact alone would not be enough to save it. My point is that if it can't even list that simple fact, it's obviously lacking in information. My Delete vote stands. --PatrickD 02:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment As part of the Committee for this convention I can understand where PatrickD is coming from, however I didn't realise that this existed till now. I will make amendments to the page and then make a comment here again and see if you are willing to re-vote. Out of etiquette I wont vote post changes either. Mystcb 16:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I have made a few changes to the page, expanded on the history a little. I am looking about for references online to name change, and also details about the Committee and such, but I was hoping to make sure I was going in the right direction with the tidy up. Mystcb 16:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please be aware of Wikipeida's polices regarding Conflicts of Interests. Convention staffers should avoid editing articles about their own conventions. --Farix (Talk) 18:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's fine, I will keep that in mind. My only defence will be that I will not vote on this, however I would like to pass it via the general consensus to ensure that I am not doing something that will be in any Conflict of Interest. I apologise if I have over stepped my line at any point.Mystcb 18:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- The problems with the article are based on the notability of the subject and the lack of reliable sources. Writing and including more sourced information is not going to help the article. If you can provide evidence through a reliable third-party sources that the convention is notable or meets one of the notability criteria in WP:ORG, then there is a possibility the article will be kept. --Farix (Talk) 18:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Fair point, I shall keep this in mind and see what I can pull up. Thank you for the replies though, hopefully I will find sources which are reliable, but if the article is deleted, then I can fully understand why. Mystcb 22:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- The problems with the article are based on the notability of the subject and the lack of reliable sources. Writing and including more sourced information is not going to help the article. If you can provide evidence through a reliable third-party sources that the convention is notable or meets one of the notability criteria in WP:ORG, then there is a possibility the article will be kept. --Farix (Talk) 18:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's fine, I will keep that in mind. My only defence will be that I will not vote on this, however I would like to pass it via the general consensus to ensure that I am not doing something that will be in any Conflict of Interest. I apologise if I have over stepped my line at any point.Mystcb 18:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please be aware of Wikipeida's polices regarding Conflicts of Interests. Convention staffers should avoid editing articles about their own conventions. --Farix (Talk) 18:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Two reasons: 1) I hadn't seen the article before I learned of the AfD, 2) That one fact alone would not be enough to save it. My point is that if it can't even list that simple fact, it's obviously lacking in information. My Delete vote stands. --PatrickD 02:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: If you knew that, why didn't you edit the article and make note of that? Everyone can edit articles here, so making this kind of comment without doing something about it is a little absurd, IMHO. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Quarl (talk) 05:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as failing WP:V unless the article gets properly referenced. As it stands I cannot determine notability because there is no independent source. Nuttah68 13:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Understandable, I have found a reference, however due to it being the people that run the sub-event at the convention, I am not sure if this is the sort of reference you are looking for. Mystcb 13:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Coredesat 19:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted again? How many times can an AFD be relisted before it is closed? --Farix (Talk) 20:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- FFS, someone close this as a "delete" already ... Chris cheese whine 21:09, 16 February 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.
