Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dinaman


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 17:02, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Dinaman

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

non notable publication Wuh  Wuz  Dat  16:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC) MUST KEEP Dinaman was a great magazine and anyone familiar with Hindi journalism, and we are talking a population that may be half of the size of the most spoken language in the world. we should improvise it and get more information. Dinaman set the gold standard and we need to understand that. I am surprised someone had the wisdom to talk about it.
 * Neutral a weekly news magazine in a major country certainly could be notable, but the article is written so poorly it's impossible to tell one way or the other. It's possible some editing might save this, but as written it's hopeless and might be better to delete the whole thing and start over. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  19:14, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It's now back to being a stub. Drmies (talk) 20:11, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep on the basis of its sponsorship by the major English-language Indian newspaper and the notable editors. I agree that's indirect, more so than I would like, but it's all I can do at with the existing cultural bias.    DGG ( talk ) 05:19, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- - Spaceman  Spiff  07:33, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Couldn't believe my eyes 1 minute after I added some categories: Good job SpacemanSpiff! --Crusio (talk) 08:40, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. easily meets meets WP:NMEDIA. Its from the TOI group and that itself is enough to meet "significant publication in ethnic and other non-trivial niche markets" --Sodabottle (talk) 08:48, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Many of the editors and sub-editors of the magazine are recipients of India's two major literary awards -- Sahitya Akademi Award and Jnanpith Award, but most of the info is hidden behind paywalls or not previewable on gbooks. I've added what I had accesss to, but the article can be significantly expanded by someone with access to sources. - Spaceman  Spiff  08:55, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 *  Keep  Most notable publication in Hindi. 25 years with Dinamaan were a high point in Hindi journalism.
 * Comment Apparently this magazine's time on WP has come... There is a second article on this journal, Dinamaan, that was created yesterday... --Crusio (talk) 11:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 2nd article was redirected to the 1st, as it was a blatant attempt by the original article author to get around this AfD. Wuh  Wuz  Dat  11:32, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

whoever calls it non notable probably has a lot to learn. it will be great if this person could achieve a millionth of what Dinaman was in the quarter century it enlightened the millions of Hindi language readers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.216.128.76 (talk) 11:41, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Its interesting to see how what was historic has to be defended in a world where its unknown. Edit it, improve it but please figure out a way of not losing good because we don't know it. Dinaman was clearly a notable magazine and it should have been on Wiki a long time ago.
 * THIS WAS A GREAT MAGAZINE. HOPE SOMEONE DOES JUSTICE TO IT ON WIKIPEDIA. THE TROUBLE WITH THE STUFF ABOUT BEFORE DIGITAL MEDIA BECAME PROMINENT IS THAT IT TREATS THE REST AS IF IT DID NOT EXIST. AM GLAD TO SEE IT HERE. HOPE SOME OF THE MILLIONS OF ITS FANS IMPROVE THE WRITE UP.
 * Comment to anonymous IPs: Please stop yelling. There is not a single "delete" !vote apart from the nom and many "keep" !votes, so this is not going to get deleted. --Crusio (talk) 12:08, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * keep that's good news. may be the one who nominated it should lose his rights to nominate. wish he took the same precaution as others did. i think the problems seem to have begun with the nomination.
 * Weak keep and expand. Seems to be notable per notability guidelines and some current sources; an increased number of reliable sources needs to be incorporated.   Cocytus   [»talk«]  00:45, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * keep it will be good to improvise it. some history, some writers, editors, key contributions etc will be helpful
 * Struck out the duplicates by IP hopper. - Spaceman  Spiff  06:17, 4 January 2010 (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.