Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SYDCON

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 both. Rjd0060 (talk) 23:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SYDCON[edit]

Non-notable gaming conventions. Prods were added and removed, but no sources were added; notability tags were added and removed, but no sources were added. With no secondary coverage and none forthcoming, they fail to meet WP:N and should be deleted.

Also nominated:

Delete: Only 110 hits on the Australian Google, no reliable sources in evidence or presented in the article; fails WP:ORG. RGTraynor 13:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete article appears to be completely made up of OR, and as already stated, fails WP:ORG. RC-0722 ^247.5/1 17:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Canley (talk) 03:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am not certain why these 2 conventions are any less notable than other conventions listed at Gaming convention. Because conventions are hardly a minstream activity I would not expect them to be mentioned in the mainstream press who I suspect would not see convention participants as part of their readership hence perhaps a lack of google hits.--Matilda ^talk 04:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both No evidence of notability, seems to be advertising. --Nick Dowling (talk) 08:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Both, both seem to be advertising for conventions that are not particularly notable. Some conventions like Gen Con definitely meet the bar, despite being niche events, but there is no indication that these ones are anything more than a couple of dozen enthusiasts playing games in a high school. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 05:37, 19 April 2008 (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.