Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Atheist Convention

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 redirect to Irreligion in Australia. (non-admin closure) — Mhawk10 (talk) 08:20, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global Atheist Convention

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. Only good reference is an article about a lack of interest in the convention, causing it to be cancelled. All other mentions seem to be brief. L32007 (talk) 07:47, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:12, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Atheism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:34, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to "Atheism in Australia" would seem appropriate. If the conference was cancelled by the third time they tried, it wasn't very notable. Oaktree b (talk)

FYI: It was not the third attempt at any conference that was cancelled. It was the third conference that was cancelled. The first two conferences occured. Aoziwe (talk) 11:07, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Irreligion in Australia as alternative to deletion (there is no "Atheism in Australia" article). Deus et lex (talk) 03:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep The Global Atheist Convention is actually three conferences one in 2010, one in 2012, and one cancelled from 2018. I must admit to not understanding at all the basis for this AfD nomination. There is clear evidence of significant coverage, including analysis, in main stream media for all three events? Aoziwe (talk) 11:28, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The only reliable and notable source on the article is one talking about the conference being cancelled. I was not able to find any significant coverage to improve the references on the page.L32007 (talk) 19:47, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look through the results to the searches I have included above. There are sources with significant content about the conferences from very reliable independent organisations such as the ABC News, The Guardian, The Age, etc. Aoziwe (talk) 09:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 02:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see discussion of independent sources
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:00, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The two conferences that were held had presentations from many important people, who have wikipedia articles. Give it time to be given more sources, or at least redirect as proposed above. --Bduke (talk) 06:49, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Irreligion in Australia - there is little RS here to establish the notability of this event. Some references quoted are not independent of the event, and the one RS of note, from the Sydney Morning Herald, mentions the event got cancelled... hardly reassuring!!! Happy to change my vote if more RS is found, but at the moment, no. Deathlibrarian (talk) 11:05, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Redirect Fails WP:GNG. Lack of significant coverage. And I have no faith that the meeting will be resurrected any time soon.— rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:12, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.