Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Second Revolution flag

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 no consensus. WP:NPASR. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:31, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Second Revolution flag

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

Per WP:NOTNEWS. The flag really only seemed to get coverage at this Scott Brown event, and doesn't seem to have any other notability (indeed, the later references only refer to the Scott Brown event.) With the scope of news coverage today, reference to a subject in regards to a greater event does not imply notability. Yaksar (let's chat) 04:32, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~There is no afd for this, it is redlinked in the article.~~--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 07:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~But clicking the red link brings you to this page, for some reason. Do you know how to fix this?~~ The red link problem has gone away, I've struck out the comments.--Yaksar (let's chat) 07:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:34, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:12, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete The only real claim to notability is the claim that "There have been more than 20,000 flags sold with orders from all 50 states." Unfortunately that isn't sourced so it may well be less. As long as sustained notability can't be established, delete. Travelbird (talk) 22:52, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think there is enough historical evidence and notability to keep this. --Kumioko (talk) 18:55, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, historical evidence? Every single source just mentions it being at one Scott Brown event. Care to explain your reasoning? Your input is certainly appreciated, but without more of an explanation it will probably be discounted.--Yaksar (let's chat) 02:15, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are several references is what I meant to say. I just don't think that there is a need to delete it. --Kumioko (talk) 00:20, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, there are several references, no one's arguing that, just that the references are insubstantial and don't show the flag was anything other than something at this one event.--Yaksar (let's chat) 00:36, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per Kumioko and per sources.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:33, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input, but AfDs are not just a vote. Would you care to elaborate on your reasoning?--Yaksar (let's chat) 16:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The fact is, the flag in this article is the equivalent of the Sarah Palin impersonator the media was all abuzz about at CPAC this year. It's something that get's a ton of coverage during that one event (although I'd hardly classify this flag as getting a ton of coverage) because it's something kind of exciting, but then is never mentioned in any significant way again.--Yaksar (let's chat) 16:17, 20 February 2011 (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.