Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Borderland Beat


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 04:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Borderland Beat

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject fails notability in accordance with WP:WEB and WP:GNG. Subject's website states, "Most of the information and content is derived from open source media, unconfirmed individual sources and personal view point of author. Most content is for information purposes only and is not from direct official sources and in most cases not confirmed. Most information coming out of Mexico is fluid, always changing on a daily basis and frankly, no one really holds the market of credible information to form sense of clear cut validity or formal confirmation, so thread (sic) lightly." While the article provides numerous sources, none actually offer significant information about the subject. When the subject fails to support their own credibility, it's concerning that there would be a number of reputable sources provided. Clearly a promotional article having been previously deleted twice as such, however, I felt this article needed assessment and community discussion due to the sources offered. Cindy ( talk to me ) 10:40, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The reliability of the subject is irrelevant to its inclusion; we have articles on notorious liars and fiction-tellers, which is fine so long as they are notable (which I am not arguing that this subject is, at least yet.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 13:43, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. The rationale for deletion is made in accordance with WP:GNG and WP:WEB. The quote made by the website merely provides additional content about the subject. Sorry for any inadvertent confusion with my personal comment about that statement. Best regards, Cindy  ( talk to me ) 15:10, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Hi! I am the creator of this Borderland Beat page. This is the second attempt at creating a page for BB, and is a definite improvement on the first attempt:) I struggled to find material that I could use that would describe what I thought made BB a notable website, and had to make do with the quote in the second opening paragraph. The quote, which describes BB as "a lonely watchtower" pursuing "the vital mission of archiving any available news on Mexico’s meltdown" more or less says it all from my perspective. In as much as it is a "lonely watchtower", I am not aware of any other English language website that makes as comprehensive an effort to cover all the news relating to Mexico's drug war, and in this respect the BB website is head and shoulders above anything else on the web, as far as I am aware. Any news blog that is put together by volunteer individuals in their spare time leaves itself open to the question, "is it reliable?" That is why I was pleased with the references I was able to find for my section "Trusted source", and I thought that that section might legitimately show that the answer to the reliability question was: "yes, it is reliable." The way I read the quote from the BB website that Cindy mentions, it is simply warning that all reported Mexican drug war news is liable to manipulation or holding back on details, and fact checking is not very easy; simply because to do otherwise may displease one or two Mexican cartels and may lead to kidnapping and torture, or worse. I don't believe that the purpose of the statement is to express a lack of confidence in the site's own ability to report the news. If the statement is written in a rather round-about fashion, I think that this is just a reflection of the wish to avoid being openly critical of the drug cartels, who have a reputation for preventing Mexican news organizations from reporting the news freely, but also have a reputation of being resentful of criticism.. A number of contributors to the BB website live in Mexico, and their safety is a concern. Just for information, the majority of material to be found on BB is sourced from Spanish language articles found on Mexican news organization websites, which are then translated into English, together with articles from reputable English language website sources. There is also a small amount of original reporting. Georgeblake (talk) 19:39, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Interesting way to read the website's comment. For the sake of further confusion, I've gone ahead and stricken the extraneous comment above. For the sake of this article, we need to show notability in accordance with WP:GNG and WP:WEB. In essence, outside of honors and awards received, we need to show significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. At the same time, this coverage needs to be about the website itself. It is not significant to merely show that the website is mentioned or used as a source for content elsewhere. Click through the links provided here to see further information about establishing notability and viability for encyclopedic articles. Best regards, Cindy  ( talk to me ) 20:07, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 30 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 16:46, 4 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - Looks like this article has notable references (including from the New York Times) that indicate the importance of the subject. It also looks like there are a few of these. Vacation9 (talk) 18:40, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. The sources aren't actually about the subject. The notability guidelines require significant coverage that is reliable and independent of the subject. Cindy  ( talk to me ) 17:39, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep and wait. Can I ask for more time? I've been working on InSight Crime and Southern Pulse, two pages that document Mexico's drug war, but I've been really busy with school work. I will be able to tackle this article after Wednesday (7th) and on the weekend. I'm sure we can work things through. ComputerJA (talk) 22:44, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. The sources provided look like they are more than enough to verify existence of the subject but not much more than that. Good reliable sources really should be about the subject itself, as Cindy notes above. Plenty of things are published in peer-reviewed journals that wouldn't pass WP:GNG as they're often just brief mentions of a particular subject. §everal⇒|Times 22:02, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. I have added the following to try and improve the page:
 * Added Georgetown University ref to "Trusted source" section.
 * Added "Der Spiegel" ref to first section.
 * Added new section "Danger to bloggers reporting Cartel violence".
 * Cheers! Georgeblake (talk) 18:41, 11 November 2012 (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.