Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motorcycle Consumer News


 * 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. Convincing evidence for WP:NMEDIA's guidelines for magazines has been presented here, specifically for guideline #5. Non-admin closure. -- Sailing to Byzantium  ( msg ),  16:50, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Motorcycle Consumer News

 * – ( View AfD View log )


 * Delete. Non-notable magazine. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:27, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sufficient reliable sources are given in the article for a strong claim under WP:GNG. Given the paucity of the nomination, it's more than sufficient. tedder (talk) 00:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * But it is of insufficient notability judging by Notability_(media). -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:40, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep A very lazy search of Wikipedia can demonstrate that Motorcycle Consumer News easily meets criteria #3 and #4 of Newspapers, magazines and journals in WP:NME. The article itself makes an important claim to notability, and even uniqueness, in the second sentence: "It stands out in its industry by being wholly subscriber-supported and does not accept advertising", with a citation of a third party book, Chilton's Motorcycle Handbook, which recommends MCN specifically because they don't accept advertising. And then the article goes on to list notable and award winning writers on the MCN staff: David L. Hough, Ken Condon, Lee Parks, Glynn Kerr, Fred Rau, and Flash Gordon (physician), who have been cited many times on Wikipedia. It is without a doubt recognized as an authoritative source particularly for motorcycle testing; though MCN is not a perfect source, there can't be any other publication that is more trusted, since they have the greatest degree of independence in their industry. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:33, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Is WP an encyclopaedia or is it the trade press?? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:07, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * What? The subject meets the notability criteria. What else is there to discuss in here? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Demonstrably a notable publication in its field.--Arxiloxos (talk) 02:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sneering at the subject because of its audience is not to the point, Newspapers, magazines and journals notability criteria specifically recognize "significant publications in ethnic and other non-trivial niche markets". Brianhe (talk) 04:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep even from the UK I know that 'the other MCN' is a reputable and significant publication in the motorcycle world. --Biker Biker (talk) 08:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep a lazy nomination for something which is well referenced, even from my UK perspective. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 22:39, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep This subject meets 3 of the 5 criteria from the Newspapers, magazines and journals notability criteria and it only needs one. Tripnoted (talk) 05:10, 2 March 2012 (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.