Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ICES - International Civil Engineering Symposium

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. MBisanz ^talk 14:12, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ICES - International Civil Engineering Symposium[edit]

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

This new article, written by the eponymous editor User:Ices516, is purely self-sourced, with no third-party sources to indicate notability. The author has removed my PROD without explanation, as is their right. I have asked on their page whether they have a conflict of interest, as the name sounds like it, and the article is pretty promotional. ("ICES'15[7] was all over a huge success", etc.) Bishonen | talk 19:26, 15 February 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Delete - It really does read like a brochure -"It was commenced with the releasing of the conference proceedings by our guests Dr. Robert Stevans". At first I thought the event itself might be notable, but with poor content, but there really doesn't seem to much mention of it online. Personally, it seems 'international' is slightly misleading. A lot of the content wouldn't be usable anyway, and as per Bishonen - with a username like that, it would seem they are only here for one purpose, though we'll await their reply Olly^{say hi} 22:41, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Olly150, but the new user has not responded to my question, although they have continued to edit (and have again moved) the article. This could be one of those unfortunate cases where the individual isn't aware they have a talkpage. There may be more chance of them joining the discussion here, which is linked to in the AfD template at the top of the article. We can hope. Bishonen | talk 09:14, 16 February 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Bishonen, I think you may be right, and I now see that the user has been blocked due to the WP:UNP violation. So unfortunately it looks like they haven't, or more likely didn't realise to, engage with the concerns. The strongest AGF but the article is what it is Olly^{say hi} 09:14, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:26, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:26, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:26, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Clearly promotional with no evidence of non-trivial third-party coverage. --Kinu ^t/_c 18:25, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per Kinu. --RexxS (talk) 21:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:53, 22 February 2016 (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.