- 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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Parsec Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Questionable notability and no sources Wade Hunter (talk) 03:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Dragon Con. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:18, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as while the article was badly out of date, that was expediently remedied by stubifying the article and adding several references to reliable sources. Broad coverage based on a quick Google search and coverage by reliable third-party sources cover verifiability and notability. Does the stub now need to be expanded? Sure, but that's not a matter for AfD. - Dravecky (talk) 19:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I believe it notable that the nominator's only edits have been in pursuit of this AfD and a previous one that just closed "no consensus". - Dravecky (talk) 19:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nja247 07:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Sources are also to be found under "Parsec Award" Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. I'm not sure if these are enough. Abductive (talk) 14:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- keep and exapand. Artw (talk) 18:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 16:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment What exactly makes the Parsec Awards notable? Is anyone on the Parsec committee notable? Anyone famous, recognizable, or an authority on the subject they are judging? How about the contestants? Are the contestants just run-of-the-mill ? I didn't notice anyone of note who won awards. Let's look at it this way: Let's say my grandma started to give awards out for the best cookie recipe and the contestants for the award were my aunt Betty, the girl down the street, and some lady from grandma's church, and some other un-notable people. Is my grandma's award any less notable than a Parsec award? Let's say that contestants for my grandma's award were Rachael Ray, Bobby Flay, Wolfgang Punk, etc... then contestants of that calibre would than make this award notable. Or, for example the other way around, if Emeril Lagasse was the one holding the best cookie recipe contest then that would make the awards notable. I'm not exactly sure this explains my point, but I do feel like chocolate chip cookies right now. In my opinion, the Parsec Awards are not notable unless there some type of authority there. Wade Hunter (talk) 21:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Notability is a techincal term here. Read WP:N. Artw (talk) 21:24, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, at the very least Tracy Hickman, a best-selling sf author, is a notable member of the award committee. But since notability is not inherited, it is better to look for independent sources. As is pointed out above, there are a smattering of sources. Debate should center on if these are enough. Abductive (talk) 21:42, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The source from Steven H Silver and the SF Site lists the Parsec nominees on a page with other award nominees for the year, some of which have articles. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 21:46, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, at the very least Tracy Hickman, a best-selling sf author, is a notable member of the award committee. But since notability is not inherited, it is better to look for independent sources. As is pointed out above, there are a smattering of sources. Debate should center on if these are enough. Abductive (talk) 21:42, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Given the notability of the originators of the award & the awardees, I think this is almost certainly notable, regardless of technicalities about sources. DGG (talk) 01:40, 19 July 2009 (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.