Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Best Moe Tournament

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. -- Cirt (talk) 11:01, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Best Moe Tournament

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

As with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anime Saimoe Tournament, this is a non-notable forum competition Jac16888 ^Talk 15:34, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please define 'non-notable' and 'forum competition'. Should a poll that had more than 10,000 voters at one point be considered non-notable? Should a event that inspired other similar international events attracting thousands of voters be considered meaningless? Should a poll open to any voters without need of registration be considered a forum competition, when there isn't a single forum voters come from? Maglor1 (talk) 16:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- An internet forum poll generally isn't notable, regardless of the number of participants. The primary notability guideline is: did the subject non-trivial coverage in reliable third-party sources? (See also specific notability guidelines for web content.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:06, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Anime as whole, is not something that is analyzed in detail by main stream media, thus claim of lacking reliable third-party sources can be used against almost all wiki articles related to anime. In fact, very little reliable third-party sources can be found for large majority of matters dealing with arts, books, and performance in most non-English culture due to the norms and history of the culture, and also often because of political oppression. The Korean word for Best Moe Tournament "최고모에토너먼트" returns 266,000 results in 191 separate webpages in Google. It returns 319 more webpage under its shortened form, '최모토'. There are many more Google results in wide range of languages, as Best Moe Tournament webpage is in multiple languages. All are independent blogs and forums, thus cannot be considered as reliable third-party sources as defined by Wiki. As noted before, this tournament inspired creation of large scale multi-lingual moe tournament, importance of which is spread out into several different language. The tournament is very unlikely to be acknowledged by main stream Korean media as the staff members involved with running the tournament has made multiple anti-government remarks in the past, plus that large media companies in Korea wish to tout their own poll as the most authoritative on the subject despite attracting less number and less diverse of voters while using means likely to induce bias. I like to put on the record, that by putting burden equivalent to Academic subjects on a multi-lingual event that English media companies won't have any interest in covering, you have placed a hurdle that thousands of other wiki articles related to matters of non-English Culture cannot hope to overcome, no matter how significant they are to a large number of diverse groups of people from different language, and especially if the matters of interest pertains to cultural events of the people that is discriminated against within their culture. Maglor1 (talk) 19:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Best Moe Tournament is not a Forum poll. The votes are registered in an website where no registration nor text needs to be entered. No visit to any forum is needed to vote. Please visit the Best Moe Tournament website to verify this Maglor1 (talk) 20:49, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:43, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No coverage by reliable, third-party source to be found. Fails both WP:NOTE and WP:WEB. Coverage by third-party sources is a requirement of the verifiability policy and is not something that can be ignored because we may like to subject. —Farix (t | c) 12:48, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Farix. It doesn't seem to satisfy WP:WEB- while the tournament has a lot of coverage on many internet websites, I have not found much in the way of significant coverage by non-trivial published works. --Slon02 (talk) 00:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as said by Farix. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 23:34, 2 October 2010 (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.