Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All Things Digital


 * 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. v/r - TP 00:44, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

All Things Digital

 * – ( View AfD View log )

contested prod. i can find no third party discussion of this website anywhere, although there are passing mentions aplenty, prod contestor asserted that there was some, but gave no examples. &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 19:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 20:00, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The blog is part of WSJ online. The passing mentions aplenty will include other blogs/news sites mention All Things Digital as the site that broke the news, got the interview etc. The reason given for deletion was 'Spam'. This Article just needs improvement or merging into the A. I know nothing about a contestor asserting there were 3rd party discussions, but to kick off the examples:

Here is the citation from the article of Walter Mossberg. What was his column 'Personal Technology' in the WSJ now is All Things Digital http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.05/mossberg.html?pg=1

Again, the All Things Digital article just needs some work, not deletion. It could be merged as a section in the articles on the founders or the redirect from the D: All Things Digital to Walt Mossberg could be removed (in time) and a new All Things Digital/D: All Things Digital article be made. Deletion of this article would impede improvement. PrtScn (talk) 21:12, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * comment &mdash; the article from wired mentioned above is about walter mossberg, not this website. it does mention the conference, although not the website. and that only in passing. the conference itself may or may not be notable, but it is not under discussion here, and it doesn't lend any notability it might have to a website that is a spinoff of it. &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:31, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Well the conference is notable. There are alternatives to deletion for this article. The site is a tech news blog under the WSJ banner so finding the 3rd party discussions to solve the notability issue will be hidden under some very expensive SEO work to get ALL Things Digital urls to the top of the rankings for anything you can search for with 'All Things Digital' as part of the search string. Norlam editing will bring this article up to scratch or see it merged with another.PrtScn (talk) 22:30, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

KEEP - as others mentioned, the All Things Digital conference is one of the most prominent conferences in the digital industry, with Walter Mossberg and the WSJ crew consistently pulling in the top names and CEOs in the field. The blog has a lineup of journalists that are must-reads in each of their fields. How this can be up for deletion is baffling. -- Fuzheado | Talk 03:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * comment &mdash; the conference may well be notable, but the article under discussion is about the blog, not the conference. this deletion discussion may in fact be baffling; many things are, but where is the third party discussion of this blog?   &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 03:21, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:53, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Run-of-the-mill IT publication, no notability established. References are only self references, not third-party. Seems like an advertisement anyway. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 12:55, 12 September 2011 (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.