Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vox Pop (newspaper): Difference between revisions
Orangemike (talk | contribs) Creating deletion discussion page for Vox Pop (newspaper). (TW) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:({{findsources|Vox Pop (newspaper)}}) |
:({{findsources|Vox Pop (newspaper)}}) |
||
Vanity puff-piece for online student newspaper which just published its first hard-copy edition today. Strong evidence of COI involvement; no hint of notability (footnotes are to paper's own website, quotes about its competition, or information about the college where it is published). [[User:Orangemike|<font color="darkorange">Orange Mike</font>]] | [[User talk:Orangemike|<font color="orange">Talk</font>]] 15:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC) |
Vanity puff-piece for online student newspaper which just published its first hard-copy edition today. Strong evidence of COI involvement; no hint of notability (footnotes are to paper's own website, quotes about its competition, or information about the college where it is published). [[User:Orangemike|<font color="darkorange">Orange Mike</font>]] | [[User talk:Orangemike|<font color="orange">Talk</font>]] 15:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
1. It's a University, not a college. Secondly, there is not hard copy, it is online. So clearly not been read. |
|||
2. I don't understand what the problem is about providing accurate information and allowing others to build on it by starting page for organisation. |
|||
3. This is one of a number of student newspapers on Wikipedia including over 20 in the UK. This IS a notable piece, but inexperienced user and poor explanation of notability requirements leaves sources not up to scratch. |
|||
More constructive advice on how to make sources notable would be appreciated instead of immediate poo-pooing. |
|||
Revision as of 16:07, 19 September 2009
- Vox Pop (newspaper) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Vanity puff-piece for online student newspaper which just published its first hard-copy edition today. Strong evidence of COI involvement; no hint of notability (footnotes are to paper's own website, quotes about its competition, or information about the college where it is published). Orange Mike | Talk 15:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
1. It's a University, not a college. Secondly, there is not hard copy, it is online. So clearly not been read. 2. I don't understand what the problem is about providing accurate information and allowing others to build on it by starting page for organisation. 3. This is one of a number of student newspapers on Wikipedia including over 20 in the UK. This IS a notable piece, but inexperienced user and poor explanation of notability requirements leaves sources not up to scratch.
More constructive advice on how to make sources notable would be appreciated instead of immediate poo-pooing.