Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steampunk World's Fair

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 keep. -- Cirt (talk) 03:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Steampunk World's Fair

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

fails WP:GNG. nothing really notable about this event. gets 5 gnews hits and most of it merely confirms existence [1]. LibStar (talk) 08:00, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - the number of attendees suggests this is not a trivial convention, and this appears to be the largest such convention. I personally think the Bergen newspaper article is just enough to meet WP:GNG. Kansan (talk) 16:51, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the number of attendees does not advance notability as per WP:BIG. LibStar (talk) 07:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not basing my stance off this number alone, but rather using it as evidence that this has strong importance in what appears to be a fast growing cultural movement based on Steampunk#Culture, in addition to the sources already provided. While I won't lose any sleep should this be deleted, I did want to clarify my rationale. Kansan (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Striking per WP:FINE. Kansan (talk) 17:36, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree that this convention fails the general notability guideline. Perhaps it is the largest convention of its kind, but I don't think that means too much, given the relatively small number of steampunk enthusiasts. The Record is certainly a reliable newspaper, but, like The Star-Ledger and others, they do tend to run a decent number of human-interest pieces each week. Being the subject of one of those articles is definitely not enough by itself to confer notability. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:18, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. —A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:18, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - there are two very brief mentions: Brooklyn Vegan and the Wall Street Journal, local coverage and most importantly this major coverage added to the existing Bergen record reference passes our guidelines, albiet barely so. As the date approaches I guess that there may be more coverage to solidify this article, but regardless, good to keep for now. - Theornamentalist (talk) 04:32, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep coverage looks ok to me once the new sources are added.

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.