Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quest 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   keep.  MBisanz  talk 00:04, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Quest magazine

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

A former redirect to the church that publishes that other Quest magazine, this page was recently turned into an article on a Quest magazine having to do with spaceflight. This seems like it presents a Notability (books) problem, and if it turns out it does, this should go back to being a redirect. --Dynaflow  babble  22:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC) 
 * Delete Per nom; also a bit too ad-like, esp. with the prices. Lets  drink  Tea  22:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom and above comment. This is nothing but an advertisement. Why would a encyclopedia article say "People interested in contributing articles should contact the editor or publisher"? The price listings are tacky and overdoing it. Ltwin (talk) 23:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as above, nothing but an advert.  S t e a lt h F o x  23:12, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd say keep, and trim out the sections of the article that make it look like an advertisement. The ISSN # link to the WorldCat website shows that there's enough libraries out there (including the Library of Congress) that keep copies of it to establish notability.  It's hard to find any articles that talk about the magazine, although I did find a few articles/papers that cited the magazine as their source.  (As a side note, it may become necessary later on to turn this into a disambig page, as there's multiple Quest Magazines out there.)  Matt (talk) 01:30, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Tropical  Cyclone  00:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep--I'm going with it, though weakly, for now, since the article appears to be peer-edited and has run for a considerable length of time. (Disclaimer: like the journal's editor, I get my paycheck from The Plains!) User:S Marshall and I have participated in an essay on this topic, the notability of certain kinds of journals and magazines--the only thing that's keeping me from fully supporting a strong keep is that there seem to be only a few references made to the journal in articles found through Google News. Perhaps a discussion here over the next few days can clear this up. Drmies (talk) 01:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep--Unsurprisingly, as the co-author of the essay Drmies cited, I also agree with its content.— S Marshall  Talk / Cont  01:38, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Matt and this already mentioned essay. I was able to find a few places where this magazine is mentioned, which also throws a few more coins onto the scales of notability.  I'd also support moving this to Quest: The History of Spaceflight and using Quest magazine as a dabpage. &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  21:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Matt. I also agree that Quest magazine should be turned into a dabpage with the magazines he linked to above listed at the dabpage. Also Quest Magazine and Quest (magazine) should be redirected to the dabpage. Finally, this article should be moved to Quest: The History of Spaceflight, which is currently a redirect. --Historian 1000 (talk) 18:34, 18 March 2009 (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.