Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liberation Frequency


 * 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. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:55, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Liberation Frequency

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article about an online magazine. There is no quoted coverage of the magazine in published, independent sources, so it does not meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. I can't find any news of book coverage of the term "Liberation Frequency" that refers to the magazine, so I do not believe it is notable. Sparthorse (talk) 21:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - No coverage in reliable sources. Sourcing in the article is entirely primary sources. -- Whpq (talk) 14:31, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

The comment below was on the talk page. I have taken the liberty of moving this here so it is easily visible to other editors in the dicussion.-- Whpq (talk) 14:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I believe that Liberation Frequency illustrates the difficulty in establishing notability for online publications. Perhaps a reconsideration of Wikipedia notability criteria is merited. Liberation Frequency is clearly a notable online magazine, given the way it is cited by various notable artists, whose notability is evidenced by their own Wikipedia pages, and who clearly value their interviews or subject articles on the publication. However, Liberation Frequency has not been independently reviewed by other media, print or otherwise, at least as far as I could find. On a personal note, even though the Liberation Frequency article is indentified as weak, I couldn't have added much substance to the Dome Records page without it.

I hope that the page can be maintained, if only because Liberation Frequency is subject to multiple citations and, hence, linkages, elsewhere in Wikipedia.

Dreadarthur (talk) 06:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - If you believe there needs to be a change to the guidelines, then it would need to be discussed at Village pump. -- Whpq (talk) 17:37, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. If LF isn't discussed in print or online media other than LF itself. It doesn't pass the test. patsw (talk) 17:55, 2 December 2011 (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.