Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surin Elephant Round-up

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. -- GB fan 22:39, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Surin Elephant Round-up[edit]

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

Effectively unsourced promo, fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 10:23, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am not familiar with how festival can be considered notable. This particular festival has national-level importance (i.e. Thais know about it and have plenty of Thai news coverages) Example from The Nation [1], Bangkok Post [2],[3] Information from Tourism Authority of Thailand [4]. International references are rarer. I can find from Lonely Planet [5], CNN (mention as example) [6], The Independent (one of many trips) [7]. Not sure how much would be enough to establish notability. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 16:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The main problem is that the article is written as an advertisement or a tourist guide. That style is absolutely not suitable for an encyclopaedia! More sources conform WP:RS are needed. The Banner talk 02:25, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 10:24, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 10:25, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 00:46, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the sources from Lerdsuwa above, which demonstrate notability. The existence of promotional material is a reason for cleanup, not deletion. C 679 10:16, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have added some tiny things which may keep this from deletion at the moment. I remember seeing a program about this a few years back so I will be making some efforts to have this kept, please do not close this debate for the next three or four days.FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 05:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I added some content , which was later reviewed by The Banner. I have now added some more and removed the maintenance tags. If hope it is enough for a keep.FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 10:09, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree now. The Banner talk 12:50, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request speedy close as keep, as nominator So much work done and context added that my concerns are solved. The Banner talk 12:50, 16 April 2015 (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.