Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rockwell Collins Ugly Sweater Day
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. MBisanz talk 02:26, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Rockwell Collins Ugly Sweater Day (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This is not a notable holiday. It is specific to only one location of Rockwell Collins, and has no notability, and no reliable sources are or will ever be available. Scapler (talk) 21:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True, this is specific to one location of Rockwell Collins, but that does not make the holiday any less notable or worthy of inclusion in the wikipedia archive. It has lasted three years and that alone should make it worthy of being included. I don't know why the holiday's perceived notablity by you has any say in its inclusion. If it is notable to the people who do it, shouldn't that be enough? nels0398 22:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ahhhhhh......................no. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 22:39, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, That logic makes no sense. Should every company's Christmas Party be included because it has been happening for years, or should the ten year traditions of every high school band be included? As far as it being important to those involved, my girlfriend, my pets, and my house are important, but they also have no mention by notable sources, and should not have their own articles either (until my dog saves the world, that is) Scapler (talk) 23:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The link goes to WP:Notability, where they talk about things like significant coverage, reliable sources, and the distinction of "notability" from "popularity". So my answer to nells0398 "it is notable to the people who do it, shouldn't that be enough" of no stands. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 00:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why not? I mean seriously, if it is important enough, similar to an office christmas party, that people would be looking for information for it. And it is correctly titled so people know what company it is without having to read through the article and be upset that it isn't for them. Then why can't that be an article. It is titled with the company in the title so you would have to look for Rockwell Collins to find it, it has people who want to know about it and be informed about it, so they could look up its history, and it is an event that is unique within the company. Now as for like a 10 year band tradition, why shouldn't that be on here. Looking back at it wouldn't you like to know who started that tradition and why? That is something that could be useful and this is the perfect place to hold that wealth of knowledge.nels0398 —Preceding undated comment was added at 02:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC).[reply]
- Further comment, Unfortunately, you do not make the pedia guidelines. WP:Notability (I suggest you read it this time) states that an article must have receive significant coverage in reliable, third party sources, and must not contain the original research your article is based on. This is an encyclopedia, and by definition not a first party resource, EVER. Scapler (talk) 02:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, That logic makes no sense. Should every company's Christmas Party be included because it has been happening for years, or should the ten year traditions of every high school band be included? As far as it being important to those involved, my girlfriend, my pets, and my house are important, but they also have no mention by notable sources, and should not have their own articles either (until my dog saves the world, that is) Scapler (talk) 23:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, fails to establish any sort of notability per WP:notability. It's not even mentioned on the companies own website. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 22:39, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, fails WP:Notability, because it is not mentioned in any third party-sources. Scapler (talk) 22:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- consider merge If this is truly a notable company event, maybe there are corporate publications that mention it. That might be the basis of a merge with the corporate article. While it seems like this is a delete article, maybe the editor can find references for a merge. Chergles (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - no significant coverage anywhere. Bearian (talk) 23:13, 8 December 2008 (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.