Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mothering (magazine)


 * 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   keep. -- Cirt (talk) 04:31, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Mothering (magazine)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Appears non-notable per WP:NOTE and WP:ORG. No evidence of substantial coverage in independent, reliable secondary sources. As a result, article is basically a free-fire zone. Should be deleted until/unless independent secondary sources are available enabling the creation of a neutral, encyclopedic article. MastCell Talk 23:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete per nom. Racepacket (talk) 06:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep ive found minimal coverage in other sources, plus the magazine has generated two books from a major imprint of one of the largest book publishers on earth. also removed some obviously poor content. I believe i have established the minimum of notability.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:08, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. 400+ hits at Google News Archives, and just on the first few pages I find overwhelming evidence of third party coverage.  There was a fracas over a breastfeeding cover; a 1997 Albuquerque Journal article (reprinted in the Denver Post) commenting that "The magazine, once a fringe publication read by hippies, has taken on broader appeal because its long-championed controversial issues - such as breast feeding, circumcision and vaccinations - have more mass appeal in the 1990s."; reports in other media of articles from this magazine; a role in a legal battle.  It gets nominated for awards and sometimes wins them. --Arxiloxos (talk) 07:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep It's notable enough + good referenced. Aleksa Lukic (talk) 11:45, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: Passes WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 14:38, 8 June 2010 (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.