Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shropshire Star


 * 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 per WP:Speedy keep as the nom was blocked as a troll/sock/poor speller. (non-admin closure) Dom from Paris (talk) 16:24, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Shropshire Star
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Page was made using primary sources many of which link back to the publication's own website. There are insufficient secondary sources to support the statements made in the page Juan Diego Sanchez from Bogotta (talk) 19:19, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:30, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:30, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

This is a regional newspaper which we have many already accepted on Wikipedia and are notable with the right references. This should have had a improvement notice not deletion. davidstewartharvey 23 October 2018
 * Comment I have found several independent sources with a few minutes. They are in the article now.
 * Keep - This is quite a large regional newspaper, to suggest deletion is extreme, but the accusation of primary sources is correct. I would state that the originator has not applied the right clean-up template to the article. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 22:07, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Your comments are fair. Which cleanup template would you say is appropriate in this instance? Juan Diego Sanchez from Bogotta (talk) 07:36, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * This would have been more appropriate Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 08:08, 24 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notable local newspaper. There is nothing wrong with refs from a subject's own website. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:51, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. References now in the article indicate sufficient substantial coverage in independent reliable sources to meet WP:GNG. Qwfp (talk) 19:09, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Notable large regional newspaper. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 01:01, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - A well-known regional newspaper. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:36, 25 October 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.