Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Science Day for Peace and Development

World Science Day for Peace and Development

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

PROD was disruptive removed by an IP editor: very irritating. Here was my rationale: No secondary sources suggesting notability, nothing in the article itself suggests notability. This is not the kind of thing that has any inherent notability.

Note also the huge number of tags: this is not salvageable. Drmies (talk) 18:18, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 18:45, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note Please note, PROD templates can never be disruptively removed as that is what they exist for. If someone removes it, then it is disputed and a deletion discussion must take place. Please make sure to read WP:BEFORE. Nothing on Wikipedia has inherent notability, it is all about finding reliable sources. In general, an article can be incubated if it is in disarray and requires substantial work to be ready for the namespace. All that is required to pass notability is significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources: Here is an article from the United Nations and another, certainly counts as at least one source, so if anyone wants to take the time to find one other reliable source among the ocean of references that exist to the topic on Google, then there is a good argument to keep the article. There are MANY newspaper articles on the topic, but I do not normally work with newspapers and so am not sure which are considered reliable sources. Footlessmouse (talk) 21:40, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]