Talk:American Digger (magazine)

Untitled
I'm trying to create a page for American Digger I keep getting a problem wanting to delete it. I look at other magazine wikipedia pages such as people magazine and can't understand what I'm doing wrong Patricia S. Smith (talk) 03:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)Patttysuesmith
 * Well, the initial submission was for being promotional, which I don't quite agree with. The text perhaps sounds a LITTLE non-neutral, though I'd disagree that it's blatant advertising. However, making sure that the article demonstrates its subject's notability is important, and something it doesn't currently accomplish. Check out WP:Notability. There isn't currently a subpage for periodicals, but WP:GROUP, because it concerns businesses, might be a relevant subpage to check out. - Vianello (Talk) 03:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
I still think that there are unresolved conflict of interest issues with this article. See Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard Smartse (talk) 07:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I should have said that it was created by the webmaster of the magazine. Smartse (talk) 07:53, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I see your point and I'm sensitive to Wikipedia being used for advertising, but the magazine seems borderline notable. It's been around for several years, and while it's circulation is not large, it's in a specialty field and has received some reliable coverage in independent sources. I came across an editor "spamming" child actor articles that may well have been their personal or their firms clients. But some of them were notable. So I'm not sure what the solution is. I think including this article probably makes the encyclopedia better and more complete. If someone wants to trim the staff listing or anything that they think is dubious and unsourced, they're welcome to it. But ithe article looks rather okay to me. I think it's time to move on to bigger fish that need frying... ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:35, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion?
A Google search of the term "American Digger" shows that this magazine has, imo, become popular enough to rate a Wiki page, I see no reason why it shouldn't be allowed to stand on its on at this point, with removal of the disclaimer. It was popular enough to rate a TV show named after it...I say let it become a part of Wikipedia. Greybird 99 (talk) 05:39, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I added a header to your comment since it seems unrelated to the above conflict of interest concerns. That said, I don't know why you seem concerned that the article may be deleted.  It was voted on back in '09 and there is no WP:AFD template on the article as of this posting.  Dismas |(talk) 23:08, 27 June 2012 (UTC)