Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northern California Solar Regatta

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. v/r - T P 01:04, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Northern California Solar Regatta[edit]

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

No reliable source coverage was provided or found for this new school competition. WP:TOOSOON --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:53, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The few references provided in article are primary. I find only primary or non-WP:RS sources from web searches. This competition is new and is not even scheduled to take place until May. WP is not a marketing tool. Fails WP:NOTPROMO, fails WP:GNG. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Hobbes Goodyear: "Marketing Tool"? Really, we don't need any marketing and I'm a bit surprised at what seems to be an undeserved accusation and conclusion here that the posting is an attempt at marketing. For one thing, no money changes hands. If the article is deleted in these next few months then it will be re-posted next year at which time it will have become an historic event.

For the record, I will accept a determination of deletion at this time only on the basis of the event having not yet happened. The accusation of Hobbes Goodyear is without a trace of merit, and I will maintain that if the article for a similar event in Temecula, the Solar Cup, is a legitimate article, then so shall an article for the Northern California Solar Regatta. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bscottbscott (talk • contribs) 03:04, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Solar Cup has taken place, what, ten times over the past decade? Your event: zero times. And the Solar Cup entry also lacks evidence of notability and, like your article, should be deleted, unless such evidence can be found.
You wrote this article, so how can you say no money is changing hands? One sponsor is the public school system--I assume that the school superintendent that you've name-checked in the article and the other school system employees involved are not volunteers. I also assume that "The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) was invited to collaborate in this event and became co-sponsors and took on the major tasks of hosting and organizing the event" means SMUD is coughing up some dough. Not sure what else they're getting, but here's what they are getting out of this WP entry:

a link to their company website
a mention that the regatta will be held at Rancho Seco Recreational Park, "managed by SMUD".
a link to a brochure for the event with their their logo prominently displayed at the top, and their name appearing elsewhere

Whether or not money is changing hands, whether or not the cause being promoted is good, bad, or indifferent, it doesn't matter: "Those promoting causes or events, or issuing public service announcements, even if noncommercial, should use a forum other than Wikipedia to do so." (see Advertising section of WP:NOTPROMO).
Despite all of this and despite your apparent connection to this event, I believe that you honestly consider this event to be important and meriting an encyclopedia entry here. So, I would encourage you to re-post this article as soon as you can provide substantial coverage of it from independent, reliable sources. But no sooner. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 05:27, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:06, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 19:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy to User:Bscottbscott sandbox until better sourcing can be found. I AGF the connected editor will add sources as they arise and resubmit this to mainpage, and I encourage that editor to go through WP:Articles for creation process to ensure the best possible result. Right now, WP:CRYSTAL applies. BusterD (talk) 14:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Userfy is fine too. There is not any real coverage of this event I can find to argue its individual notability at this time.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 17:01, 14 March 2012 (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.