Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sentinel (Staffordshire): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:48, 25 December 2017

The_Sentinel_(Staffordshire)

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

The Article has had multiple issue tags since 2012 without any improvement despite multiple attempts to rectify. Stefan Sperl (talk) 08:03, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Article reads like an advert with out citing references in multiple sections. Stefan Sperl (talk) 08:03, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Article makes numerous unsubstantiated claims, no references, and nothing can be found when searching for references from third parties. Stefan Sperl (talk) 08:03, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Given that this Article has been nominated before and tagged with numerous major issues for 6 years with out being able to improve it seems unlikely that this Article is in keeping with Wikipedia’s standards. Stefan Sperl (talk) 08:03, 25 December 2017 (UTC) Stefan Sperl (talk) 08:13, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2017 December 25. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:25, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 10:35, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 10:35, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 10:36, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I do not see how any of the points above invalidate the article's claim to notability. The Sentinel is a prominent local newspaper and newspapers with its circulation seem to be regarded as notable. The article should be improved, not deleted. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:25, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Mattythewhite. AfD is not cleanup. I see that the nom has gone out of their way to make the article look worse than it is, with over-tagging at the top of the page and going OTT with CN tags through-out the article to make their point. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:45, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Given that the first issues tags from 2012 are will unresolved despite many clean ups and the article reads as an advert full of opinion rather than a factual entry into an international encyclopedia it would be very hard to see this as notable by any stretch of the imagination. I would suggest adding the title as a section or mention on a parent page for regional papers from the country rather than a page in its own right.LewisChu (talk) 21:38, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article hardly meets the standards of Wikipedia and as mentioned above these issues have been on going since 2012 with multiple attempts at clean up and correction. With regards to notability; I would agree that this article should be a subsection or note on a list or parent page instead of an entire page itself. DanielLSmail (talk) 22:48, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 *'''Keep''' Per Mattythewhite. AfD is not cleanup. I see that the nom has gone out of their way to make the article look worse than it is, with over-tagging at the top of the page and going OTT with CN tags through-out the article to [[WP:POINT|make their point]]. '''[[User:Lugnuts|<font color="002bb8">Lugnuts</font>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:Lugnuts|Fire Walk with Me]]</sup> 18:45, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' Given that the first issues tags from 2012 are will unresolved despite many clean ups and the article reads as an advert full of opinion rather than a factual entry into an international encyclopedia it would be very hard to see this as notable by any stretch of the imagination. I would suggest adding the title as a section or mention on a parent page for regional papers from the country rather than a page in its own right.[[User:LewisChu|LewisChu]] ([[User talk:LewisChu|talk]]) 21:38, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' This article hardly meets the standards of Wikipedia and as mentioned above these issues have been on going since 2012 with multiple attempts at clean up and correction. With regards to notability; I would agree that this article should be a subsection or note on a list or parent page instead of an entire page itself. [[User:DanielLSmail|DanielLSmail]] ([[User talk:DanielLSmail|talk]]) 22:48, 25 December 2017 (UTC)