Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Norfolk 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. ‑Scottywong | [speak] || 22:09, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

North Norfolk News

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Prod was removed to AfD. I just don't see how this passes WP:NCORP, there is no significant coverage for this local newspaper. The citations provided are purely primary and not secondary sources which is really required. Govvy (talk) 18:48, 20 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Comments I have now improved the entry citing a number of secondary sources. I disagree that this organisation does not fit the criteria of WP:NCORP Notability. The subject is a well-established (since 1940) weekly newspaper covering an area with more than 100,000 inhabitants. Although there may be no “significant coverage” of this newspaper from other sources online, you have to consider that a major news source in its area, it is far more often providing coverage of other topics, rather than being the subject of coverage itself. There are also many entries about newspapers of a similar or smaller size with few secondary sources on Wikipedia, so for consistency, this entry should also be allowed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Weekly_newspapers_by_country. SCAnderson (talk) 07:28, 21 September 2020 (UTC)


 * You are using North Norfolk News own website in the article is a clear case of primary sourcing which should be avoid. Along with their twitter account and the parent company Archant are also primary sources. The circular is small, and the fact you work for North Norfolk News is a clear WP:Conflict of Interest. I still don't see this passing WP:NCORP in my opinion. However that is my opinion, need other people to weigh in. Govvy (talk) 10:47, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:41, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:41, 21 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep: sufficient secondary sources given to establish notability for a local press. -- Whiteguru (talk) 10:40, 28 September 2020 (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.