Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acton Fall Fair

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 and redirect to Acton, Ontario. There's not a duplicate !vote here, but it seems the consensus of average is to delete and redirect. I am not merging current content because consensus is the article is based on inferior sources. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:52, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Acton Fall Fair

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

Well written article about a local fair. Nothing beyond local coverage, and can't find a whole lot of in-depth coverage even there. Simply doesn't pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:30, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:20, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:20, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:33, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:57, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Potential Keep - Agricultural shows are significant events in my country e.g. Royal Bath and West Show. I first looked for "Three Counties Show", for which there is no article but we have Three Counties Showground. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:04, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, agricultural shows can be "significant" — but they're not exempted from having to pass WP:GNG just because they exist. Bearcat (talk) 19:38, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:09, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Acton, Ontario since I am not convinced of its notability but it may deserve a blurb on the main page. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 12:36, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:33, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There's only one non-primary source here to even begin establishing notability, and it just links to a general content directory for the defunct local community weekly while providing no title or date information to help us figure out where in its 100+-year haystack the content actually being cited might be found. This is exactly why I keep getting on people's necks about the need to provide complete citation details and not just blank URLs or links to generic content directories. Something like this would have to clear WP:ORGDEPTH on the basis of coverage that expanded beyond just the local weekly newspaper, but there's no evidence of that being shown at all. It can absolutely be briefly mentioned in the town's article, but the sourcing here doesn't earn it a standalone article of its own independently of that. Bearcat (talk) 19:37, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Acton, Ontario. As it stands we have an article about an event based on poor sources. I'm not seeing much available beyond some rather routine local coverage. It's presently mentioned in the main Acton article, so a redirect seems sensible. I would say that I don't oppose a merge, but as the current article is based almost entirely on primary sources there's not really anything to be merged. No opposition if someone wants to elaborate on its coverage in the Acton article a bit. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:28, 25 June 2018 (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.