Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ShmooCon

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. -- Cirt (talk) 12:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ShmooCon[edit]

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

When I did a Google search, I could not find any significant third-party coverage to establish the notability of this event, so it appears that it is not notable outside of the hacker community. If reliable sources (those outside of the community, and not linked to it) are found and added to the article, then I will withdraw the nomination.

As it stands now, of the three links in the article, one is a mailing list, the other is the Shmoo website, and the one story link only briefly mentions the convention in passing. ArcAngel (talk) ) 07:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. -- Danger 14:27, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. The Google book search turns out a reasonable number of hits providing not entirely trivial (although also not very deep) coverage. Examples: [1][2][3][4][5]. The Google news search also has several hits, such as this. IMO enough to establish at least a marginal level of notability. --Lambiam 23:19, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. ShmooCon is notable enough up and down the East Coast. The EFF attends, it is covered extensively in the tech and mainstream press. --dinomite (talk) 12:25, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Focusing on news articles regarding the conference itself will be no good, just as there are few articles on conferences like DEFCON and BlackHat. The articles are going to be based around content presented at such gatherings. If news articles are generated from the presentations given at Shmoocon then that lends to its credibility. For example: [6], [7], [8], [9], and [10]. It is an established conference with years in running. Had this been its first year in operation, I would agree to remove the page, but after over five years of sold-out conferences its notability is shown. Rurik (talk) 14:47, 14 February 2011 (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.