 | This article was nominated for deletion on 1 June 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.svg)
CoastCon has been selected as a candidate for deletion on the grounds that it is "advert with no evidence of notability." May I ask how this was determined? CoastCon is a convention with a recognized history. Links to appropriate sites where more information is available were provided and the format of the article is consistent with similar conventions listed on Wikipedia.
I have added two sites that offer just a sample of why the article wasn't an advertisment. More would have been posted, but the articles from the Biloxi Sun-Hearld archives are pay articles and it is unseemly to require wiki users to pay to use historical entries to verify sorces. Any wiki editor is free to do so if he or she feels the need however. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cccfranks ( talk • contribs) 04:44, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- I suspect the nomination for deletion was due at least in part to another area convention (no names, please!) having been similarly nominated for a deletion. We have seen this sort of nonsense before. At any rate, this article clearly serves as more than just an "advert". 74.243.33.233 ( talk) 05:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
|
| This article was nominated for deletion on 1 June 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
|
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
CoastCon has been selected as a candidate for deletion on the grounds that it is "advert with no evidence of notability." May I ask how this was determined? CoastCon is a convention with a recognized history. Links to appropriate sites where more information is available were provided and the format of the article is consistent with similar conventions listed on Wikipedia.
I have added two sites that offer just a sample of why the article wasn't an advertisment. More would have been posted, but the articles from the Biloxi Sun-Hearld archives are pay articles and it is unseemly to require wiki users to pay to use historical entries to verify sorces. Any wiki editor is free to do so if he or she feels the need however. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cccfranks ( talk • contribs) 04:44, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- I suspect the nomination for deletion was due at least in part to another area convention (no names, please!) having been similarly nominated for a deletion. We have seen this sort of nonsense before. At any rate, this article clearly serves as more than just an "advert". 74.243.33.233 ( talk) 05:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)