Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sweet 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.  MBisanz  talk 21:57, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Sweet magazine

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

This article makes no claims of notability. One of its references is to a media guide that may show circulation data (aggregate seems to be 460,000, which seems quite high--but composition matters), but it is in Japanese and the information is in bitmap format, so translation software fails to identify it. Neither of the other references does anything to demonstrate the notability of the subject, and there are no hints in the article. It has been tagged for reference improvement for more than a month and nobody has touched it since the day it was written. Bongo matic  22:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as non-notable. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:18, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 04:02, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 04:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable. Fg2 (talk) 04:30, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, basically per nom. The references provided do not demonstate notability, and google searching in English does not turn up much either. If somebody can find Japanese sources demonstrating notability, it would be a different matter, but as it stands does not pass either WP:N or WP:ORG. Nsk92 (talk) 02:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: smells like sweet spam. Notability was not asserted. Alexius08 (talk) 10:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The magazine isn't notable and the article does have a tinge of spam to it. The magazine label itself could be notable under the guidelines for orgs; but this article doesn't attempt to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nja247 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete - To save on the pileon I will leave my rationale as "per nom". &mdash; neuro(talk) 06:53, 20 November 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.