Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pagini Romanesti


 * 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 delete. Sources don't seem to provide notability. Note that there is no requirement or even suggestion that sources we consider reliable are themselves notable. ansh 666 04:09, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Pagini Romanesti

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The sourcing here just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Here's what we have:


 * An article from the newspaper itself (not independent)
 * A Google result (a search is not a source)
 * The newspaper's YouTube page (come on)
 * An interview with the newspaper's founder - that doesn't even mention this newspaper (!)
 * A biography of the founder, again not about the newspaper
 * Some random festival announcement
 * Some cruft
 * Some kind of interview on a PR website
 * An interview with the ex-president of Romania
 * An open letter that this newspaper's editor happened to sign
 * A blurb about a new bookstore, the only connection to the newspaper being that its founder is also behind the store

As I think is now clear, coverage of Pagini Românești is slight indeed, and "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" is basically non-existent. For that reason, we should delete. - Biruitorul Talk 17:09, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

It's funny that an article about a newspaper that is quoted quite often in Wikipedia is not meant to have a page. IQ Ads does not publish paid articles. Or at least, what I saw was not the case with the example quoted. There are articles with far fewer quoted sources (see Evenimentul zilei). The newspaper in question is published from 2001, it is not something new and it is important for Romanian community in Canada. I cleaned the references again. I would prefer constructive suggestions, especially because I want to make pages for the rest of the Romanian publications in Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgraur (talk • contribs) 18:24, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Even if "IQ Ads" were a completely legitimate source (it isn't), the only fact attested by that article is that one Viorel Anghel is editor of this paper. Given that every newspaper on earth has an editor (some of whom are notable individuals in their own right), this doesn't really get us to notability. - Biruitorul Talk 18:42, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  18:32, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  18:32, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  18:32, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  18:32, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  18:32, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 20:47, 4 April 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete No mention of Pagini Romanesti in scholarly sources or mainstream media despite 15 years since it's foundation. My Lord (talk) 18:06, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 13:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC) @biruitorul: Wrong. The article is not about the editor, is about the newspaper. The title is "24 pages of Romanian Pages published twice a month at Montreal". You need to explain why a IQ ADS, a publication for the media and advertising industry in Romania, is not a source. Otherwise is only an opinion, not a fact. Mainstream media? Google is your friend: https://www.realitatea.net/un-samurai-in-romania-cine-este-kohei-oishi_2141042.html or http://evz.ro/oishi-maestru-samurai-romania.html or http://www.gsp.ro/sporturi/gimnastica/montreal-in-alb-si-negru-s-a-intors-in-trecut-nadia-de-acum-55-de-ani-a-privit-spre-nadia-de-atunci-14-ani-522797.html or http://www.prosport.ro/alte-sporturi/un-cunoscut-antrenor-japonez-va-coordona-loturile-olimpice-de-judo-ale-romaniei-17077662 or http://adevarul.ro/news/sport/interviu-kohei-oish-sportul-arata-mai-caracterul-unui-popor-1_5ab3e006df52022f75e52060/index.html Public person: https://mihailneamtu.org/2016/04/01/o-minoritate-curajoasa-poate-salva-civilizatia-occidentala/ And only in the last month. But I don't think that is important. I'm Romanian and I live in Montreal from years. I have a pretty good idea about the Romanian community in Quebec and Canada. Google News thinks the newspaper is important and is indexed. I can't find another community newspaper indexed by Google News. A lot of editors from Wikipedia (English, French and Romanian language) are thinking the same and you can find the newspaper indicated like sources. Sure,this newspaper is not NY Times or Washington Post but I thing is good enough to have an entry in Wikipedia. If you fell is not, please delete. Is not worthy to lose our time disputing this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgraur (talk • contribs) 16:23, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
 * One blog post by a marginal politician and one interview with a Japanese judo coach that happened to be picked up by Romania's mainstream media do not constitute significant coverage of Pagini Românești newspaper. It's been weeks since this discussion began, and I think it's quite clear by now that no real indication of notability is going to emerge. - Biruitorul Talk 17:41, 19 April 2018 (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.