Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bananafish Magazine


 * 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   keep. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:29, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Bananafish Magazine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This page is a stub, in addition to notability issues. BDP3300 (talk) 19:26, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. I think there's a strong case for keeping either this or an article on its founder (known by the pseudonym Seymour Glass), for their cultural importance, even though this was in a largely pre-internet age and hence there's a shortage of online sources. The Wire, Britain's most important experimental/art music magazine calls it "influential" and praises it. It played an important role in Shut Up, Little Man!


 * Glass worked with critically acclaimed singer-songwriter Barbara Manning in Glands of External Secretion. And his links to art-rock band Thinking Fellers Union Local 282.


 * It's also cited in some Wikipedia articles as an expert on experimental music. Fanzine coverage. Here's a review of a CD given free with the magazine. I also came across a claim that its contributors included Daniel Clowes and possibly other notable underground cartoonists, but I'd like to confirm that. The article needs some more work to find sources. But also, being a stub is not a reason for deletion.


 * Note: there seems to be a more recent and unconnected literary magazine with the same name. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:39, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * My major concern was with the notability issues. I probably could have been more specific initially with the reason for deletion. This article hasn't seen action for approximately 5 years, and that was another flag for me. You shot down the notability issues, however, and I think justified it pretty well. B 22:35, 8 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BDP3300 (talk • contribs)


 * Comment i tried to find refs. not much. as an underground zine active mostly before the net, there may be little on the net to find. maybe theres an archive of the issues, or print commentary on it.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:48, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * KeepI think that the article meets the requirements for notability. I also think that since it's pre-internet and sources are difficult the notability issue and the merits of the subject matter shows good purpose for keeping the article. {{User:Tews|Tews]] (talk) 07:55, 11 April 2013 (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.