Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hellomagazine.ca


 * 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, defaulting to Keep. Only the nominator has argued for deletion and a merge has no consensus here. This has no prejudice to a merge taking place for which discussion should continue on the talk page. Davewild (talk) 18:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hellomagazine.ca

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable news website. While it does seem to have a quite substantial reader base (see Alexa), there seems to be very few pages linking to it (see Google - note that while Google says "about 1,330" on the first page, this is lowered to "about 16" on the next, due to "we have omitted some entries very similar to the 16 already displayed". They are, indeed, very similar). I do not see how this article can be considered as passing Notability (web). Also note that the creating user Cprice is a suspected sockpuppet. Jobjörn (talk) 01:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep – The article on hellomagazine.ca was posted because news from this site is on Google News quite frequently (sign up for google alerts on hellomagazine.ca and you'll get one almost everyday). I'm sure there likely will be a linked article page created for Hello! Canada magazine soon too as the two are connected. Hello! Canada magazine and hellomagazine.ca are fairly new (one is weekly news and one is daily news as per the two separate articles on the properties) but have a huge readership and fan base as per the established Hello!/¡Hola! brands —Cprice (talk • contribs) 14:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep – In doing some research, I did find one source showing that the site was getting over a million and a half hits a month as of January, 2008, which is notable, .  In addition, there do seem quite a few other sources linking or showing their source was hellomagazine.ca.  However, sorry to say, I could not find any information on the magazine on Google News, which was disappointing. Nor could I find any in-depth articles from reliable – credible and verifiable sources  pertaining to the company.  If the original author or any other editor could show or cite additional sources, I would change to strong Keep and I am sure that would persuade Delete opinions, which could be justified at this point, to vote keep. Thanks. ShoesssS Talk 01:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Question: How does a high hit count imply notability? Jobjörn (talk) 02:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - seems that it should be notable, but unsure if it is. What bothers me is that Hello! Canada doesn't even have an article. Considering that is a notable title I find it rather surprising. Canterbury Tail   talk  01:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral Tough call. Would need a good overhaul. Problems with notability/WP:RS. -- Taroaldo (talk) 03:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep but expand. The website is part of the Canadian edition of Hello! which is a major magazine. I'm actually surprised an article on Hello! Canada hasn't been written yet, so alternately this article could be expanded (and renamed) into an article on the magazine itself. 23skidoo (talk) 03:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge into Hello! or a new article on Hello! Canada. It's silly and backwards that we have an article on the supporting website but not the magazine. See Time.com, NYTimes.com .... --Dhartung | Talk 04:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge as per User:Dhartung Jasynnash2 (talk) 09:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 19:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Hello! per Dhartung.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 22:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep unless or until an article is written on Hello! Canada in which case it can be merged. I must say that I am amazed by the sparsity of information in the Hello! article, and by the fact that there is no article on Hello! Canada. Surely this is a more important subject than a single episode of Friends or a Pokemon character? For some time I've been trying to help combat systemic bias by improving and referencing articles about subjects from outside the developed anglophone world or from the pre-internet era, but I didn't realise that we had the same problems with major subjects in Western popular culture. I can only presume that readers of Hello! Canada have better things to do with their time than editing Wikipedia. Phil Bridger (talk) 00:03, 29 March 2008 (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.