Negros Trade Fair: Mccapra ( talk ) 21:08, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Philippines .  Mccapra ( talk ) 21:08, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Delete - Created 2012 and never sourced, none of it.  Very little content and looks like it was meant to be a list but nothing happened.  — Maile ( talk ) 23:42, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Explanations do not support the user's "speedy" stance.  Timothytyy ( talk ) 09:22, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Oppose : neither the nominator, nor anyone else, have provided assurances that a reasonable search has been made for additional sources per WP:BEFORE I'm willing to change my vote to delete if assurances are provided that those searches were made Jack4576 ( talk ) 08:05, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] As a keep voter, have you found any sources?  LibStar ( talk ) 08:32, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Good point, I've amended my vote to an oppose of this possible misapplication of WP policy, rather than a keep which would be an endorsement of this article's content Jack4576 ( talk ) 08:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] not sure what assurance you’d be looking for, but I did say in my nomination that I couldn’t find any coverage in reliable independent sources (RIS).  To be more specific I meant online and in English.  It is possible that there are offline sources or sources in Tagalog or Cebuano, so that’s what we’re here to determine.  Mccapra ( talk ) 09:33, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Ah, my esteemed compatriot Mccapra, your words are as clear as the first light of dawn.  You have sought for truth, yet within the constraints of the digital domain and the English language.  Such efforts are indeed commendable, yet do they not leave us wondering if more could be found elsewhere?  In acknowledging the potential for offline sources or those in the rich tapestry of Tagalog or Cebuano, you have inadvertently made my case.  It is this very possibility that fuels my argument for a 'keep' vote.  For should we not delve a little further, cast our nets a bit wider in the vast sea of knowledge before we make the irrevocable decision to delete?  By no means do I propose a herculean task, but merely an expanded consideration, to ensure we do not unwittingly discard a gem amidst the pebbles.  Jack4576 ( talk ) 10:40, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] there might be, yes, or there might not.   The article has been tagged with WikiProject Tambayan Philippines for more than a decade but no sources have been forthcoming.   The article creator asked for time to add sources but then didn’t add any.   The deletion discussion has of course also been notified to the Philippines WikiProject so editors familiar with those languages can weigh in if they find anything.   So there are plenty of opportunities for people who can find sources to do so.  Mccapra ( talk ) 12:49, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Neither the nominator or the speedy delete voter have responded in terms of online SIGCOV.  Also nom please explain on what is RIS.  Timothytyy ( talk ) 09:22, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] RIS?  Valereee ( talk ) 16:18, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] reliable, independent sources?  -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:47, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] apologies yes RIS reliable independent sources.  Mccapra ( talk ) 09:33, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Ah, sorry...I had missed that in the nom or I would have connected the two.  :) Valereee ( talk ) 12:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - @ Valereee , Mccapra , Timothytyy , Jack4576 ,  and LibStar : - General related note to this nomination.  This list was created in 2012.  Manila F.A.M.E. International is a trade show, un-sourced and also created in 2008, and has images.   Too bad neither of these were sourced, but I don't know how to remedy any of this myself.  — Maile ( talk ) 18:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, RL0919 ( talk ) 23:31, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks for the ping, Maile66 .  There do appear to be sources, I've added, haven't done a thorough assessment but I'm leaning Keep .  Oldest provincial trade fair is a plausible claim to notability.  If it survives I think we should probably just strip out the unsourced detail.  Much of the prose looks like it might be in one of the sources.  Valereee ( talk ) 19:08, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Some sources have been added; relisting to allow discussion of these.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Vanamonde ( Talk ) 18:00, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep User:Valereee has added some sources that, while not overwhelming, I believe that this slips over the GNG line.  That said, much of the article is un-sourced (e.g. the list of awards) and it would be best to remove those unless a source is found.  (Anything removed can be added later when there are sources.)  Lamona ( talk ) 09:50, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Meets WP:GNG with sources added by Valereee to the article.  They're reliable and in-depth enough IMV.  SBKSPP ( talk ) 01:57, 3 June 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep