Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vox Pop (newspaper): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 10: Line 10:
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.
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.
More constructive advice on how to make sources notable would be appreciated instead of immediate poo-pooing.--[[User:Alexanderryland|Alexanderryland]] ([[User talk:Alexanderryland|talk]]) 16:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:08, 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)[reply]

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.--Alexanderryland (talk) 16:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]