Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spark09
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
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. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:03, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Spark09 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable conference that fails WP:GNG. Qworty (talk) 23:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete – None of the individual speakers are notable, a google news search generated no relevant hits, and the only source that it cites seems to be basically an online brochure detailing the time, date, and ticket prices of the event. --Mathnerd 101 What I have done What have I done? 23:37, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. czar · · 02:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. czar · · 02:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LFaraone 03:29, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 May 18. Snotbot t • c » 20:55, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete lack of coverage from independent sources, fails WP:GNG. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 23:56, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- speedy keep: nominator's recent disgrace suggests that it would be prudent to step back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkBernstein (talk • contribs) 03:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC) [reply]
- Delete Can't find any independant sources, zero Google News mentions. LFaraone 17:24, 25 May 2013 (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.