Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ping Zine Magazine


 * 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. No independent verification of the magazine's notability. If it were notable, the publisher shouldn't really have much difficulty in providing evidence. DrKiernan (talk) 17:06, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Ping Zine Magazine

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Spam by. I wasn't able to find reputable sources to establish notability. This page has been created and speedily deleted three times (with which I was uninvolved), but this time (the fourth creation of the page) speedy deletion was declined by an admin. —Caesura(t) 06:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't find references supporting notability either. -Verdatum (talk) 15:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I believe that I put up the speedy delete tag for two of those deletions. There is no assertion of notability and no independent sources cited.  will381796 (talk) 17:49, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep I declined the speedy because it seems it might be notable, with 45,000 circulation, and the spam could be removed. But if not,this Afd will permit further removals via speedy. DGG (talk) 07:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * My concern with that circulation number is that it is unsourced. Also, relatively speaking, 45,000 is a pretty small circulation number.  Does WP have a guideline for newspapers/magazines stating that above a certain number of cirulations it becomes notable? will381796 (talk) 12:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, there's no notability guideline for newspapers, but there is a proposal (which I was unaware of until just now): Notability (media). This doesn't give any quantitative circulation criterion, but it does suggest that a newspaper may be considered notable if it has a "substantial" circulation. It's not clear what that means quantitatively, but there is some discussion on Wikipedia talk:Notability (media)/Archive 1. But even if we were to accept that a newspaper with 45,000 circulation is inherently notable (which I don't), we would still need that figure to be verifiable. At present, no one other than the magazine itself is claiming that it has a substantial base of subscribers. Moreover, even if the topic is decided to be notable, it still needs to meet our verifiability policy, and it's not clear that this topic is at all verifiable in independent, reliable, secondary sources. —Caesura(t) 12:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * the relevant circulation figure is dependent upon the nature of the paper--this isnt a general newspaper, but a very specific trade magazine--usually 45,000 is pretty good there. I've asked the journal for documentationDGG (talk) 11:03, 14 December 2007 (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.