Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Living (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Per lack of notability which was not contested. A redirect may be created at editorial discretion; merge didn't gain consensus. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

International Living
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability: sufficient in-depth RS coverage cannot be found. Previous AfD closes as keep; however, only one source was presented, which does not meet  WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:GNG. The article has been extensively edited by apparent COI accounts (followed by reverts), so potential for further WP:PROMO time sink exists. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:32, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:33, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:46, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:46, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:46, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:47, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * delete as it stands per nom - David Gerard (talk) 09:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:50, 8 September 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge/redirect Personally I don't see that WP:GNG or WP:NCORP are established by the references in the article itself. However, with consideration to the previous AfD discussion (which seemed to establish notability on the basis of sources not actually mentioned or linked in the article), one imagines the 2 sentences in the stub could be merged/redirected to the Agora, Inc. article (erstwhile parent company?), or Bill Bonner (author) article (founder?), or a similar article. Personally I'd add a "publications" section to the Bill Bonner (author) article, merge the 2 sentences into that section, and make the source article a redirect. Per nominator, what little (non promo) content that might be added here wouldn't seem to warrant a standalone article. Guliolopez (talk) 10:04, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:40, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * *Comment-- a Redirect / Merge to Bill Bonner (author) would be an acceptable solution, as he's the primary driver behind the publication. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC) Strike comment per discussion below. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:09, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete I don't see the significant coverage required for this to exist. The magazine fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. I'm agnostic to a redirect but I don't think it should be merged. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:25, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not mentioned in Bill Bonner (author) article, and R to article without mentions should be avoided, although it seems that he has higher influence on this topic than The Agora. If this is to be redirected, neither target would be more suitable than the other, so delete. SST  flyer  16:05, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:32, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Relisting comment: Pinging Articles for deletion/International Living participants who mentioned sources not discussed here or in the article:, , , , and . Cunard (talk) 23:32, 25 September 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.