Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FinCon (2nd nomination)

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. The "keep" comments are mostly totally unrelated to Wikipedia's notability standards: e.g. "attracts thousands of attendees" and "has been paramount in bringing financial education and uniting those who want to spread this in the world". The one reason which does refer to the relevant notability concept, namely "Major media mentions", turns out to mean brief passing mentions and non-independent and/or unreliable sources such as press releases. The "delete" comments, meanwhile, are directly related to the notability guidelines. (Incidentally, "it passed" in the previous AfD means that the discussion was closed as "no consensus" with two participants in favour of deletion and one for keeping, the latter being the creator of the article.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:42, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FinCon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. No reliable sources in the article, and all Google search results are from non-notable blogs affiliated with the conference, or are blog articles written by conference attendees regarding the conference. (Note that this is a blogging conference.) Newslinger (talk) 09:07, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. Newslinger (talk) 09:16, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Newslinger (talk) 09:16, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Newslinger (talk) 09:16, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Newslinger (talk) 09:16, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Newslinger (talk) 09:24, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Newslinger (talk) 09:24, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:27, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I feel a need to tackle the barrage of sources. They are an interesting mix of Sig Cov failures (average length 3 lines, Fox News seemed longest with 8), not actually a link to a relevant article, pure listing info (in the form of just saying they exist) and traditional unreliable sources. None of WP:NORG, WP:NEVENT, WP:GNG are satisfied. I've not myself checked the COI and SPA situation, but if so I would also advise a SPI check. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have now reviewed it myself, but a SPI check is already underway, in any case Nosebagbear (talk)
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.