Deletion of Conference on Artificial General Intelligence

Comment: like some of those above, I found plenty of sources, many of them "significant coverage", but few of them independent of the subject. I suppose that's to be expected for a conference like this - who else is going to write about it but those who spoke, attended or are otherwise interested in the subject? http://hplusmagazine.com/2011/09/01/report-on-the-fourth-conference-on-artificial-general-intelligence/ This, for example is a good source that provides more than significant coverage in a magazine ''not'' specifically connected to the conference. But, as was pointed out above, it's written by Ben Goertzel who has spoken at a couple of the conferences (though he only co-presented at the one he writes about in that article) and is now listed as an organiser. There's also industry-style coverage (like http://books.google.com.au/books?id=o8o-AQAAIAAJ& this) in publications like New Scientist. Then there's blog stuff like http://www.londongloballaboratories.com/fifth-conference-on-artificial-general-intelligence-the-next-steps-to-brilliant-product-design/ this from Robert M Wenzel who seems sufficiently well-respected for his blog to perhaps be a |reliable source, with footnotes and everything. The New Scientist style stuff is probably the most convincing. I'm maybe not ''entirely'' there but I think there's just enough for me. Open to being convinced either way
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)