Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conservative news outlets


 * 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. I agree with Laurdecl that people are likely to be looking for a list, and a redirect to "media bias" is not quite suitable. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:47, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Conservative news outlets

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

case of WP:OR DarjeelingTea (talk) 22:18, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Media bias per Conservative media redirecting there already. I was considering a speedy redirect when the AfD was started, but I'm fine with letting the AfD run for now. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:19, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect withdrawing my original delete nom and support redirect as per TonyBallioni DarjeelingTea (talk) 22:22, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 22:41, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:20, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

*Delete Is this article a fucking joke? Not only is it badly written and entirely unsourced (what could the sources for this even be, one wonders) it's also stupid. Supervoter (talk) 04:38, 23 February 2017 (UTC) (Note: since this user is The SUPERVOTER, his votes are worth 10 REGULAR VOTES in all Wiki discussions. Thanks for your understanding. Please see my userpage if you have questions.)
 * Delete as unsourced original research. TFD (talk) 01:27, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Media bias, topic is covered. This article is pretty much just an opinion piece. Creator claims will "add content", and if that content is any valid, it can be added in media bias. κατάστασ  η  02:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This user's actions are being discussed here.  J 947  05:35, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Delete or redirect?
 * Redirect to Media bias. Potentially notable topic, but awful definitions and no sourcing. Just a sample: "Where the reporting of information is based upon what is heard or seen, then the news is unbiased". Even eyewitness memory does not meet this standard of objectivity and several limitations have been recognized. Dimadick (talk) 12:55, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as essay-like WP:OR. I disagree with redirecting, as the meaning is quite distinct from the suggested target (people would probably be looking for a list). Laurdecl talk 03:31, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with Laurdecl.  Even if redirected, though, it must be deleted first.  And this is without prejudice to a new article here.  Unscintillating (talk) 21:25, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:43, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:OR. No need for redirect. MB 01:54, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:REDLINK. Could be an article, but this is blatantly not it. Patar knight - chat/contributions 20:18, 8 March 2017 (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.