Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UK 2016

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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 redirect to 2016 in the United Kingdom. MBisanz ^talk 01:16, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

UK 2016

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

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Kvng with no ping (despite the fact that I explicitly asked for one in the PROD) and the following rationale "WP:DEPROD consider merge to World Esperanto Congress". I would have supported the merge but the target article doesn't really have room for detailed discussion of the individual conferences, not that there is much to say, through I do have to say this one tries - it discusses things like the logo design, etc. Unfortunately, the sources fail our requirements: they mention the event in passing, or fail RS due to being primary/self-published. Most individual conferences are not notable; their series are more likely to be so - and nobody is suggesting that World Esperanto Congress should go. It's individual sessions, however, are not notable. I don't see an Esperanto wikia, perhaps fans of the language should consider starting one for such entries. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:51, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft for now perhaps and if not, it can be deleted later or merged however needed. This could be kept but it's still questionable for solidity at best. SwisterTwister talk 06:32, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:32, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:32, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Slovakia-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:32, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or redirect to World Esperanto Congress. ~Kvng (talk) 14:10, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Such a generic title certainly shouldn't lead to either an article about or a redirect to an article about Esperanto, so, whatever the notability or otherwise of the subject it needs to be covered under a different title. I very much doubt that more than a tiny percentage of readers typing in "UK 2016" would be looking for information about an Esperanto conference. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:58, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You make a reasonable argument for delete here. ~Kvng (talk) 04:22, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And I would suggest that after deletion this title should be redirected to 2016 in the United Kingdom. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 08:13, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I like that too though that that would technically be a redirect request. I'm going to leave my !vote as it is. This can be handled by the normal editorial process once the AfD discussion is complete. ~Kvng (talk) 14:42, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree that this discussion is about this article, which should be deleted. My observation about creating a redirect afterwards was more in the way of a reminder to myself to do so. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:11, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Charmed as I am to discover that there still is a World Esperanto Congress, I can find no indication of notability. The list of the locations of annual meetings at the main article suffices. No redirect is necessary since the World Esperanto Congress is a sturdy search term for any one interested in the subject, even though all such persons really ought to be googling in Esperanto, not English.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:53, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nakon 18:14, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No obvious indication of lasting notability, nothing that can be merged and make sense in an existing article, and a highly unlikely redirect target. I would not object to its being redirected to 2016 in the United Kingdom, but people looking for "UK 2016" are unlikely to be looking for anything to do with Esperanto. Kahastok talk 20:52, 27 May 2016 (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.