Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C California Style & Culture 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 delete. T. Canens (talk) 00:44, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

C California Style & Culture Magazine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

no evidence for notability -- all sources are primary from the magazine, or a peripheral mention from Huff Post.  DGG ( talk ) 05:36, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:47, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:47, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. The only independent RS is the Huffington Post whose article is not about C Magazine, it is about Katie Holmes and what she said in her interview in C. The article is also a bit spammy. SpinningSpark 16:17, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's been around for some five years. The L.A. Times called it "a glossy lifestyle publication" based in Santa Monica. Its P.R. department should get busy trying to get it written up in a reliable source instead of pushing it onto Wikipedia before it becomes really well-known. That said, it warrants an article in WP, but the present article should be cleansed of puff and made thinner until it gets more notice by WP:Reliable sources, which I propose to do. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 17:54, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 09:01, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - it's a real magazine.PE65000 (talk) 11:29, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Existence ≠ Notability SpinningSpark 11:50, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. As Spinningspark notes, existence is not notability. It's good that the article has been cleared of puffery, but the result just makes it clear that the magazine is not (yet) notable. If reliable sources provide more coverage in the future, the article can be revived. --RL0919 (talk) 16:55, 9 May 2019 (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.