Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Sustainable Energy Days
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. John254 04:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
World Sustainable Energy Days[edit]
- World Sustainable Energy Days (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Delete Article about non-notable conference. Borderline CSD G11 Mayalld (talk) 22:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 03:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SoWhy 21:36, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- keep. Tons of ghits. Improving energy efficiency has much to do with communication — Highlights from the World Sustainable Energy Days Conference summarises presentations at the 2008 conference, and I think is enough to establish notability single-handed. With a couple more hits like that, this AfD will be WP:SNOW --Philcha (talk) 14:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment WOW, yours is the only !vote recorded, and already you are calling it WP:SNOW. The source doesn't look to establish notability. Mayalld (talk) 18:52, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- comment: It was so easy to find the example I quoted that I think this AfD is destined to become WP:SNOW. Note that WP:DELETE says improvement is always preferred to deletion. How long do you think it would take you to improve the article to the point of unquestioned notability? --Philcha (talk) 19:44, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep, of course... sigh, this one is obvious. In fact, I think that there should be a separate entry for the Energiesparmesse as well. How come the nominator thought that this could possibly be non-notable?? Most ridiculous nomination I've read here in ages. Tris2000 (talk) 11:30, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 04:53, 27 November 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.