Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earth Negotiations Bulletin


 * 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. (non-admin closure) SST flyer 02:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Earth Negotiations Bulletin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

notability-tagged and primary sources only tagged for four years, NN Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 01:45, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  07:27, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  07:27, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Publications-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  07:27, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:40, 15 April 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:21, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep I'd put forward this journal article (which directly discusses the publication in question, as is clear from title and abstract) as evidence of notability of this publication: . SJK (talk) 02:44, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep I've added several sources for further developing the article on the article's talk page. More readly available. At present, a poorly written article, but an important, notable publication, in my opinion. An unconventional publication (it is not a journal, nor really a magazine; staffed by a semi-volunteer squadron of interns/ analysts/ reporters from around the world), it is simply the go to source for day-to-day reportage at all major international environmental convention negotiations -- as evidenced by coverage in The New York Times, Washington Post, and elsewhere. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 10:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep especially if this can be better improved. SwisterTwister   talk  05:41, 28 April 2016 (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.