Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spectrum (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. Per the evidence of notability provided. Mergers and the like can be discussed elsewhere. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:13, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Spectrum (magazine)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Spectrum magazine is hardly a notable resource almost all of the sources link to the website also spectrum magazine does not get much coverage Jonnymoon96 (talk) 01:57, 6 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I would agree this article also does not meet notability requirements, what is the next step?...Simbagraphix (talk) 11:49, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

well first off i am thankful you are here to discuss this since there is not much discussion  i will probably add the speedy delete template--Jonnymoon96  (talk) 22:32, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * You cannot tag a page for speedy deletion unless it unquestionably meets one of the speedy deletion criteria. Lack of discussion at WP:AFD does not even come close. -- Red rose64 (talk) 23:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Nightfury  10:42, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Nightfury  10:42, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: relisted in the hope of discussion  DGG ( talk ) 04:36, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  DGG ( talk ) 04:36, 13 December 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep. The significance of this publication in Adventist circles seems to be substantiated by the source in the second footnote.  As such it passes Notability (media). Of course it would be a stronger demonstration of notability if there were more than one independent source cited for the proposition. --Arxiloxos (talk) 05:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:00, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Wrong forum As a split from another article, a notability concern for this topic does not need admin tools; and as per WP:Deletion policy, content discussions at AfD should be moved to a proper forum.  Note that the fourth snippet in WP:BEFORE D1 Google news is from the Washington Post in 2015 and states, "...the independent, progressive-leaning Adventist magazine Spectrum."  Unscintillating (talk) 03:33, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. A few minutes WP:GOOGLETESTing shows that there are quite a number of high to mid quality sources that collectively meet WP:GNG (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/seventh-day-adventists-vote-against-female-ordination/2015/07/08/42920f7e-25c8-11e5-b77f-eb13a215f593_story.html http://www.union-bulletin.com/news/education/walla_walla_university/adventists-unity-document-sparks-church-rift/article_bb96de18-9331-11e6-af7e-173a85b5e91a.html; https://thecompassmagazine.com/news/womens-ordination-a-reckoning-at-the-annual-council-2016-part-1;  https://www.scribd.com/document/214056313/Understanding-the-Ford-Crisis-in-the-Pages-of-Spectrum).  Fiachra10003 (talk) 14:37, 28 December 2016 (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.