Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Name of the Year

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 keep. No one has provided any compelling evidence that the subject passes WP:GNG. ‑Scottywong | confer _ 05:17, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Name of the Year

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

Not notable, per WP:GNG MikeMan67 (talk) 22:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete. Non-notable as per WP:N and WP:GNG. No references failing WP:V. Could probably have been speedy deleted as per WP:A1 and WP:A7. N4 (talk) 03:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence of notability and no sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 06:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This article could be improved, but the topic is most likely notable, as Årets navn is mentioned in other articles in main stream media in Norway, like NRK (Norwegian National Broadcasting) [1]. VG's award of Årets navn is one of the most well-known awards in Norway, as it annually gathers an at least six digit number of votes in a country with five million citizens. There is a factual error in the article, as VG just ranks as the second biggest newspaper in Norway (messured by number of copies printed). Grrahnbahr (talk) 23:06, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you perhaps improve the article by expanding a bit on why it's notable and worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia? You need to cite from multiple, independent third party sources, per WP:GNG. Or at least direct me to where I could find this information? I wasn't able to find anything myself along these lines. If you have reliable sources for what you say here, I'd be happy to withdraw my nomination. mikeman67 (talk) 17:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I dunno if I should vote as I've created the article concerned. Whilst I admit the content of the article is rather sparse, a deletion will mean that articles for several smaller prizes, like Norwegian of the Year (Ny Tid), have to go, too. ~~By the way, I can't understand why I named it Name of the Year.~~ [I didn't.] It should be moved to Name of the Year (VG), as there are heaps of similar awards around the world. No More 18 (talk) 04:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hey there. Generally, things like WP:Other stuff exists aren't considered an inherently valid argument for keeping an article - see WP:Inclusion is not an indicator of notability. As those articles mention, anyone can create an article, and this doesn't establish other articles' notability. After all, it was you who created Norwegian of the Year (Ny Tid). However, I do see that Grrahnbahr makes some interesting points about the award's notability that warrant some consideration. I think if some valid, independent, third party sources can be found it would help a lot. mikeman67 (talk) 17:54, 9 February 2014 (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.