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. Upon reviewing the article and searching myself for further WP:RS I see a major challenge with this type of article? Is it notable? Maybe. Are there RS, unfortunately not. Even looking at Anime convention there are practically no references to speak of, and those that are listed would generally not be considered as reliable. With that being said, RS and N are two very pillars of this site, and to operate with articles not reliably sourced goes against the core premise of the project. I do not intend this rationale to be prejudice for further AfD's and I hope RS can be found for all. If additional RS come to light I have no problem with any admin restoring article. Tawker (talk) 19:47, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Naru2u[edit]

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

Article deleted by PROD, then userfyed at the request of the author. It has now been restored without changes to notability. No coverage by reliable and independent sources. Esw01407 (talk) 02:11, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I tried finding coverage, but there just isn't any out there for this convention. It's listed in the usual anime/manga convention databases (AnimeCons, etc) and there's a smattering of blog and forum posts out there, but there is no actual coverage in places that would be independent of the N2U and in a place we'd consider to be reliable. It's just your typical run of the mill small anime convention, the type you'd see pepper the landscape of any country. It just isn't notable enough for an article at this point in time, if ever. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:22, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of a disclaimer: Esw01407 asked for my advice about how to proceed with this article, so I was aware that this would be coming to AfD. He did not ask me to vote one way or another. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:22, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Nearly all of the Canadian Anime Conventions listed on Wikipedia are poorly covered by external sources, even Anime North which is Canada's largest convention. So if we deleted this one, it would set a precedent to delete them all, especially since most are comparably small in size (e.g. Nadeshicon, Animaritime, G-Anime, etc.). That said however, I believe the convention is now defunct, so there's that. — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 21:35, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Io Katai: I disagree size does not always tie into notability, you are talking about deleting them all while conventions such as Otakuthon has the notability. I would look for sources before placing them up for deletion one by one. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:35, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Size is only relevant in that it suggests that there may be more sources available on the topic. So a small convention will typically have a lesser number of external sources talking about it. Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that nearly all of the Canadian conventions are barely sourced and would therefore fail the reliability and notability guidelines. Using one counter example doesn't change that fact. I mean, looking up sources for Animaritime, Nadeshicon or G-Anime leads to nothing more notable than sources for Naru2U. — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 03:04, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the deletion of this article wouldn't really set a precedent as we've had more than a few articles on small conventions of varying types get deleted at AfD. In general, most conventions tend to get fairly poor coverage regardless of where in the world they are, whether it's in America or in Canada. I've seen plenty of American anime conventions get nominated for deletion and end up getting deleted because nobody covered them. I could probably search and find about a good few dozen applicable AfDs that closed as a delete because it was a small con that got little to no coverage. In short, notability is decided by coverage in reliable sources independent of the topic. While it'd be nice to keep articles on every con, we can't keep an article for any other reason than notability proven through coverage in reliable sources. We can't make allowances based on the size of the con- we still need the coverage. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:25, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here are some examples from various different years. Most of these deleted articles are American conventions. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) Basically, just saying that the only way to argue for this getting kept is to provide coverage in reliable sources. I don't mean that to come across harshly, just that it's the only way to show notability for anything by the current notability standards. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:35, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then if the precedent already exists, we should follow up and nominate the others mentioned for deletion as per the same reasons. All I'm saying is to be consistent when applying rules/guidelines. — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 16:35, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent|lambast 11:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:31, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:31, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - there just isn't enough reliable sources about Naru2u to meet notability guidelines, unfortunately. Even "usual" sources, such as Anime News Network, have very little to no coverage. Satellizer (´ ･ ω ･ `) 11:13, 25 August 2014 (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.