The result was keep. -- Bongwarrior ( talk) 00:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC) reply
There is no question that his matter is notable and the sources reliable. I believe that it is written neutrally, though naturally that is up for discussion and improvement. ∴ Therefore | talk 23:11, 23 February 2008 (UTC) replyWikipedia considers the historical notability of persons and events. News coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, but not all events warrant an encyclopedia article of their own. Routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for an article.
The result was keep. -- Bongwarrior ( talk) 00:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC) reply
There is no question that his matter is notable and the sources reliable. I believe that it is written neutrally, though naturally that is up for discussion and improvement. ∴ Therefore | talk 23:11, 23 February 2008 (UTC) replyWikipedia considers the historical notability of persons and events. News coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, but not all events warrant an encyclopedia article of their own. Routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for an article.