Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Hudson Park UFO sightings

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. NW (Talk) 02:39, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

North Hudson Park UFO sightings[edit]

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

Delete does not seem to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. After googling "North Hudson Park Ufo" without quotes I get 20K hits and 11.5K with quotes. These are largely from blogs, wiki mirror sites and ufo websites which are all unreliable sources. Also note that the current article has only one citation and that is from a story from a local newspaper.--Jersey Devil (talk) 13:04, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect, Merge, or Delete Could be merged or redirected into North Bergen, New Jersey. Eh, it's an option, but without real sources, I could get behind just deleting it as well. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 14:14, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Week Delete - It is important to differentiate the broad topic of UFO sightings from the narrow topic of these specific UFO sightings. UFO sightings as a broad topic is clearly notable... but notability is not inherited... to say that any specific sighting is notable, you need to be able to establish that the specific sighting is notable on its own. You need to cite reliable sources that discuss the specific sighting in some depth. So in this case, we need reliable independant third-party sources that discuss (beyond a passing reference) not just UFO sightings, but the North Hudson Park sightings in specific. The question is whether such sources exist. Blueboar (talk) 15:43, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Week Keep The article now has two sources, of which the recently-added one is the Village Voice. If the article's assertion about Peter Jennings covering it is true, and a source can be found to corroborate that (perhaps one that indicates the date of the episode), then that might make for a stronger keep too. Nightscream (talk) 02:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, even in UFO lore. Gets some passing mention [1], but it ain't no Roswell. Mandsford (talk) 20:07, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete - It is difficult to assess the credibility of the sources. Racepacket (talk) 17:20, 28 November 2009 (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.