Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eratosphere


 * 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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 16:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Eratosphere

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a notable website. Wikieditor600 (talk) 13:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:49, 2 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak delete: I've found four passing mentions of the Eratosphere as "a poetry forum", over a longish period of time. None of these satisfy WP:GNG since they are just passing references, often in conjunction with mentioning another site, but they do suggest that this website might have a meaningful userbase of some kind. My finds: 1 2 3 4
 * I was able to access this journal article to find this passing mention: "One sees evidence of the diminished role the university plays in contemporary poetry merely by listing some of the most influential recent developments in American literary life, most of which happened off campus. ... notable changes include ... the creation of electronic networks and journals like Poetry Daily, Contemporary Poetry Review, and Eratosphere, linking individual writers across the nation" (45).
 * I was not able to access this article which also came up in my search and might have some more detailed coverage of Eratosphere.
 * If the article stays, I'd recommend describing the site as a "forum" (as these sources do) to better explain what it actually is. The number of passing references, and their context, makes me wonder if some proof of notability might still be lurking out there somewhere. But without two good sources for GNG at the moment, I say delete. ~ oulfis 🌸 (talk) 07:22, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting because the nominator has been blocked.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   19:19, 9 June 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. a Google search indicates that this item is referenced in several published books and publications. I feel that this does meet WP:Notability. --Sm8900 (talk) 17:35, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Able Muse. --Lockley (talk) 09:25, 17 June 2020 (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.