Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northern Dragons

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. Keeper ǀ 76 19:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Dragons[edit]

The subject of this article appears to lack sufficient notability for inclusion: the subject does not seem to have received non-trivial coverage in independent, reliable sources. No such sources are given in the article and an online search for sources (including a standard web search and Google News and Books searches) yields only about 30 non-duplicate non-mirror websites, which are mostly blogs, discussion forms, and the like, and provide only directory-level coverage or passing mentions of the group. The article was previously deleted per PROD and restored (deletion log), so I am bringing it to AfD. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 17:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support The article clearly deals with a group of interest and note to a very small subset. By the look of the article there are only a handful of people involved. it does not seem to meet the criteria for notability any more than my mother's bridge club does, and there are nearly 16 of them! --Brideshead (talk) 19:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wizardman 16:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ILIKEIT, but I'm afraid that the group isn't notable enough for an encyclopaedic entry. I could only find trivial coverage about them in (halfway) reliable sources, like [1]. The group has won a number of contests, including two at Pilgrimage (demo party), but I don't think that this is enough to establish notability.
Weak Delete. I find much more ghits than the the nominator though, "Northern Dragons" assembly alone gets over 100. Amalthea^Talk 14:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to lack of sources. Stifle (talk) 13:16, 2 September 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.