Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esri Developer Summit

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. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 08:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Esri Developer Summit

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

no evidence of notability for this conference, which does not warrant a separate article. DGG ( talk ) 05:44, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:15, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:02, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There are about 62 hits on Google Scholar. Most of these relate to the presentations made at these conferences, which verify the conferences exist, but don't confer notability to the conference itself, because one could consider published papers routine parts of many conferences. There are mentions of the conference in various GIS books, but I saw no in-depth coverage in the books I sampled. There are a number of news articles about the conferences, but all that I looked at turned out to be press releases from ESRI. In short, no independent sources were in depth and no in depth sources were independent of ESRI. I'm led to the conclusion that, unless I missed something, this topic fails general notability guidelines WP:GNG and because this is a corporate-sponsored conference, WP:CORP as well. --Mark viking (talk) 02:34, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are just about enough sources on the Net to prove that the subject exists, but not that it's really notable. MezzoMezzo (talk) 10:14, 24 February 2013 (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.