Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slash 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 consensus was to Delete. -- VS talk 12:02, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Slash magazine

 * - (|View AfD) (View log)

Slash magazine is does not meet the notability standards ([{WP:N]]) and does not assert this with references. Completely unreferenced article.Boomgaylove (talk) 05:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete-per aboveBoomgaylove (talk) 05:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Speedy close and keep (in light of the below). Nominated in bad faith by disruptive editor who is now indefinitely blocked, in an attempt to delete material from J Stalin article on claim that the source, SLASH magazine, was not reliable.  Note how he first deletes the reference to SLASH, then deletes the material as unreferenced..  The magazine is clearly notable - nearly 40,000 google hits, including a number of news articles speifically about the magazine in the Los Angeles Times.  I won't bother to make the full argument.  This AfD nomination is screwball.  Wikidemo (talk) 02:33, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Most of those hits, including the LA Times articles, are for other periodicals named Slash, especially the Slash Records-associated Slash (fanzine), and other uses, such as "Big-3 slash magazine ad spending". 9 Ghits for slash "Kyle Hinton", and only 76 unique hits for slashmagazine.com, and an Alexa ranking of 11,613,461, with only 10 incoming links. Shawis (talk) 05:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * comment - thanks for clearing that up. You seem to be right.  When I google "slash magazine" and "kyle hinton" in various combinations I get only a handful of google hits each time, the most significant of which is a mention in a blog, and no news stories.  Therefore, although I still think the nomination was in bad faith and the closing admin should take that into account when weighing the nominator's statements, the claim itself is probably correct and the magazine appears to be non-notable. Wikidemo (talk) 04:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete. I was sure that I would be able to estalish notability via secondary sources, but I could not. I find it hard to believe that a glossy paper art magazine that is for sale internationally and in places like Borders Bookstore isn't notable, but if it is, I can't sift a good reference from among all the punk magazine hits. Xymmax (talk) 19:48, 26 February 2008 (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.