Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PC Advisor


 * 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. (non-admin closure) JudgeRM   (talk to me)  02:45, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

PC Advisor

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (media) requirement. It is a minor publication that has never risen to the limelight of notability, I am afraid. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep - fairly well-known within that ever-shrinking market, but marginal IMO. Shritwod (talk) 15:09, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge into a master IDG properties page. Thanks for collecting these, Piotr. Since IDG's websites are basically filters for a master article list, it's silly that we have a page for each one. Jergling (talk) 20:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. See COI editor keep argument at my talk page: . --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 16:07, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Given WP:BEFORE B5, nomination does not show basic preparation to defend the value to the encyclopedia of deletion.  Nor is WP:N a content guideline; so stating, "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (media) requirement." is not determinative as to the need for a notability concern.  As other editors have implied, a notability concern is not a deletion argument under the WP:ATD.  Unscintillating (talk) 05:27, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 16:55, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Hmm, it is always hard to find sources about magazines and related media, because obviously magazines dont write about their competitors. I googled a bit and PCAdvisor's reviews are getting referenced in other publications, so they aren't niche. The print market is dying out for everyone, but their online portal on the other hand has quite impressive stats. They get 14.1 million unique hits and 30 million views every month (link) and Alexa ranks them on #365 in the UK. I think the metrics show that they are quite relevant in the UK. Dead Mary (talk) 21:09, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per Unscintillating; a publication doesn't lose their WP:N points just because of the Internet existing to make print duplicative. It's the UK sister to PC World, one of the top 3 US PC publications, so the notability remains clinched.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 21:51, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * 'Keep Uk version!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hurlinfo (talk • contribs) 12:44, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Unscintillating & Nate - Notable magazine in the UK and IMHO the article needs expanding not deleting. – Davey 2010 Talk 01:04, 2 December 2016 (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.