Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NJToday.net


 * 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 and move to The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate. (non-admin closure) f  e  minist  11:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

NJToday.net

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable Biggus Dictus (talk) 01:27, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete: I couldn't find any reliable sources covering it in any detail. SL93 (talk) 23:37, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. http://njtoday.net/about-2/history-of-njtoday-net/ says: "On July 13, 1822, Smith Edgar published the very first issue of the Bridge Town Museum & N.J. Advocate in a print shop on Main Street. That four-page publication is the original ancestor of the current NJToday.Net, New Jersey’s oldest weekly newspaper." This is not an independent source. It is from the company's website. But I am listing it here to establish the connection between NJToday.net and the 1822 established newspaper The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate.  The book notes: "The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate first appeared as a weekly printed on Saturday, July 13 1822. Smith Edgar was the proprietor and the office was on Main Street but the printing was done at Elizabeth. The terms of subscription, two dollars per year. In the fifth number of the paper, which appeared on the 10th of August, the name was changed to The Runway Museum and New Jersey Advocate. The paper had but five columns on each of its four pages making twenty in all. Under its heading was a motto extracted from one of Shakspeare's plays, 'Nothing extenuate nor set down aught in malice.' The paper was far from being white, but was as good as that on which the majority of journals published at that day were printed. On the first page a story entitled 'lolanda, or the Court of Love a French,' was commenced; it was finished in the second number. Besides the story there were given in the first number several poetical selections under the head 'Garland of the Muses.' In the first column the second page appeared an article on some then instances of 'Turkish Barbarity.' In the editorial column the editor offered an apology for the that had occurred in bringing out the first issue, which he explained was on account of unavoidable obstacles in getting out a new paper. He also gave notice that a celebration of the national anniversary taken place in New York on the 4th of July, when there was a greater parade than had been witnessed there for years before, and when a new drama 'The Battle of Lexington,' was performed and was received with unbounded applause. 'In own neighborhood,' says the editor, 'universal exertion was made to celebrate the day, and Milton foremost in its endeavors.'"  The book notes: "The first newspaper that we have any record of, as published within Rahway, was the Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate, the first issue being July 13, 1822, and Smith Edgar being  the proprietor. The first portion of the title was soon dropped, and there have been numerous publications since that time. In 1840 Josephus Shann established the Rahway Republican, which has been  continued under different titles, without cessation, and is now the Union  Democrat. The establishment was purchased by Lewis S. Hyer, then of Freehold, Monmouth county, in 1865, and he is still the owner and  editor, with John I. Collins as manager since July, 1896. About 1860 the publication of the paper that was at first the Museum and  Advocate, suspended, and the appurtenances were purchased by Mr. Shann and consolidated with his establishment. Subsequently a publication was started by a company, taking the title of Advocate  and Times (the latter having been the name of a publication also  suspended), which has been continued under different titles, and for  some time as the New Jersey Advocate, by a stock company, the present editor being Harry B. Rollinson." There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow NJToday.net to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 06:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)</li></ul>


 * Seems to me that above is an argument for notability of The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate, not NJToday.net. Are there independent sources which show they're identical (or even related)? --Biggus Dictus (talk) 03:47, 28 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree that the sources show The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate is notable. I was unable to find an independent source to connect NJToday.net and The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate. I am fine with renaming the article to either The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate (or the newspaper's latest name that has been verified by an independent reliable source), keeping the "History" section about the paper's history, and removing mention of NJToday.net if no editors can find an independent reliable source that verifies the connection between the two. Cunard (talk) 05:42, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Renaming as you suggest makes sense to me.Biggus Dictus (talk) 20:51, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Pinging, who declined the speedy deletion. Cunard (talk) 06:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Yes, I thought there might be sources. I think the ones just mentioned are sufficient.  DGG ( talk ) 21:31, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep & move to the name suggested. Regional papers tend to be notable, and this one passes the test per available sources. The article could be trimmed down though. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:40, 1 May 2017 (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.