Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kewl


 * 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. Although consensus was not clear, lack of WP:RS and WP:V for the article after a month and a half on Wikipedia was a factor in my decision. These are core and foundation principles of Wikipedia. Pigman ☿ 06:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Kewl

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Brand new teenie-bopper magazine isn't notable. Note, there's a somewhat complicated history here. Kewl was originally about the word Kewl and the magazine. Then somebody split them into two articles. I already speedied the turd left behind about the word. This should go too, but it's not as obvious as the other part so I bring it to AFD. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. With half a million copies, and a list of advertisers that includes Disney, AT&T, Sony Pictures and Honda, I'm afraid this publication, despised as we may find it, has achieved notability. Owen&times; &#9742;  23:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep in mind, it's not sold a half million copies, it's gave away a half million copies for free. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Valid point indeed. But even if the next issue only sells 5,000 and the publication is closed, there is value in documenting such a spectacular failure in our encyclopedia as a notable publishing flop. Owen&times; &#9742;  13:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Question-- Claimed to be published monthly; have there been any issues other than the first free promotional issue? I cannot tell from the website. Most new magazines fail, no need to keep this if it is a one-off. Kablammo (talk) 10:44, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * They at least are still claiming to have another issue out soon (Warning - don't follow this link if you are diabetic.) Doesn't look like article is headed for deletion at this time, but a year from now could be a different story.  Citi Cat   ♫ 14:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * See WP:NOT -- RoySmith (talk) 14:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not arguing for keeping it, I'm just saying it looks like it will be kept. Anyway, CBALL would apply to an wiki article about an upcoming issue, not the magazine itself.  Citi Cat   ♫ 23:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep -- sweet as it is, it is apparently an ongoing magazine, with 10 issues a year and subscriptions, per kewlmag.com. It also should be noted that CBS's KEWLopolis is kind of a tie-in with the magazine, so that may add some notability. -- azumanga (talk) 03:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Keep arguments are citing the subject. This is not using WP:RS and does not WP:V. "HomeKewl Magazine, the Hottest New Teen Celebrity and Music Mag" is just so much fluff. We need verifiable evidence of meeting WP:CORP or WP:WEB. No google news hits. No assertion of notability in the article. Cheers, :) Dloh cierekim  22:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't find a single independent and reliable source about this. Does not meet our notability guidelines.  Less than 40 google hits when searching +"Kewl magazine" -Wikipedia -blog.  GRBerry 04:02, 24 November 2007 (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.