Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pawtoberfest

: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. After three relists and a lack of discussion, consensus cannot be determined. (non-admin closure) — Music1201 ^talk 13:22, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

=[[Pawtoberfest]]=

:{{la|Pawtoberfest}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pawtoberfest Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Pawtoberfest}})

Local event organised by non-notable local organisation, and written up in local media. Does not appear to pass WP:GNG. PamD 22:21, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 11:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 11:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Pawtoberfest has received national recognition in the form of an Animal Planet acknowledgement.57 Watt 20:26, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete - Non-notable local promotional campaign by a local campaign. I'm sure they do good work, which we should all support, but this is a GNG fail. Carrite (talk) 16:56, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
What exactly would Pawtoberfest need to qualify for preservation?57 Watt 17:22, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:47, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:34, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Comment to the above comment by {{u|57Watt}} - it would require two or three good sources dealing substantially with the subject published in independent books, articles, or newspapers of presumed reliability. Carrite (talk) 02:10, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: final relist — Music1201 ^talk 17:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 17:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

: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.