Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Severed Fifth (2nd nomination)
to the Bacon article.  This one neither meets NBAND ''or'' the GNG, and that makes this a slam dunk.  I'm unmoved by Ahunt's  argument, because if this ''was'' a significant industry economic story, multiple reliable sources would say so, in detail sufficient to establish the notability of the subject. "All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material ... If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it."  These are core content policies of Wikipedia, and establishes a basic principle: it's not whether ''we'' think something is important that matters, but whether the world has taken notice.  It hasn't, and per , that means an article on the subject cannot be sustained
— [[User talk:Ravenswing|''' '' Ravenswing '' ''']], 18:41, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Stance: merge
Cited policy: WP:ITSIMPORTANT||WP:V (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)