Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Art & Deal


 * 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   delete. postdlf (talk) 19:34, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Art & Deal

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Poorly sourced article about a magazine that exists. No evidence of notability. Fails WP:GNG. - MrX 19:43, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete WP:CSD. Also fails GNG. --Randykitty (talk) 14:34, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete no real coverage, just some newspaper mentions in passing such as "Art & Deal's art critic says ..." and the cited Chronology. --Bejnar (talk) 20:53, 19 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep  I strongly object the proposal of  deleting this entry. Art and deal is a very important document of India's changing art field. It has been in print for more than a decade now! And reputed critics and scholars regularly write for it (Saying this as a subscriber and as someone who has been witnessing the quicksilver Indian art field from close quarters ).

The lack of sources have nothing to do with its importance, but the competitiveness of the market and the fact that it has survived so long without promoting itself with fake or paid "news". Also let's not forget that it in itself is a media that creates sources!

Nonetheless, I have added a few reliable sources. Hope this helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arty Lighter (talk • contribs) 18:50, 20 June 2014 (UTC) 
 * Keep I know no accurate way to judge this, so, on the basis of WP:Cultural Bias, I think we would better serve our users by including it.  DGG ( talk ) 19:48, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Mdann 52   talk to me!  07:26, 26 June 2014 (UTC)




 * Keep I know there are not many sources to justify Art & Deal's inclusion in Wikipedia, nonetheless it is an important magazine on Indian art and deserves to be in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnkishore (talk • contribs) 18:40, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment "I think this is important" is not a good rationale to argue for keeping this article. As for cultural bias, that would only be the case if we would be giving this magazine a harder time than others. On the contrary, all sources are acceptable, whether in English or in one of the Indian languages. If not even such sources can be found, I don't see a way to write a verifiable neutral article. --Randykitty (talk) 18:50, 26 June 2014 (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.