Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tampa Bay Parenting 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. BD2412 T 01:52, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Tampa Bay Parenting Magazine

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Clearly PROMO. No links to any critical discussions of the magazine, all I find are articles they've published. Oaktree b (talk) 16:34, 1 March 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Social science,  and Florida. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (work / talk) 16:47, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Article edited to now include dozens of reliable and authoritative sources. Notability is presumed for magazines under WP:NMEDIA that verifiably meet, through reliable sources, one or more of the WP:NMEDIA criteria. Tampa Bay Parenting Magazine meets at least one, and probably all of them.  It has (1) produced works that have received well-known/significant journalism award (multiple Florida Magazine Assn awards); (2) has a significant history (15+ years of issues); (3) considered by reliable sources to be authoritative  / influential in subject area (cited dozens of times by every local TV station and newspaper); (4) frequently cited by reliable sources (cited dozens of times by every local TV station and newspaper); and (5) significant publications in non-trivial niche markets (Tampa Bay area, parenting).
 * Leglamp123 (talk) 00:12, 4 March 2023 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Leglamp123 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. – The Grid  ( talk )  20:09, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth WP:NMEDIA has been deprecated as a subject-specific notability guideline; it's currently an essay that lacks community consensus in support of it. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 06:14, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep While, it does have some issues with promo from the old version. With the edits however, it now seems like a fairly normal and good wikipedia article. It has a lot of sources and doing a quick Safari search wields a lot of results about them. Sorry if anyone disagrees with this. Have a good day. Tvshowoflife (talk) 18:50, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 02:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Simply no WP:IS WP:RS discuss the subject directly and indpeth. Affliated orgs publishing their works and promo articles do not meet the guidelines.  // Timothy :: talk  21:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete fails [WP:IS] MetricMaster (talk) 08:21, 23 March 2023 (UTC) This user has made 47 edits to Wikipedia. Their contribution history shows that 38 of these were to AFD discussions. The account exists for votestacking and has been blocked.
 * Delete: This page was described accurately in the nomination. To their credit, pagecreator User:Leglamp123 immediately bulked up sourcing, but most of that has now been correctly slimmed by uninvolved editors (whom I thank for their efforts). IMHO, all the presented and applied sourcing amounts to entirely Tampa Bay local coverage. This is by no means a speedy keep, and the other keep assertion seems a vague exaggeration at best. I'd be okay with a merge to List of parenting magazines or List of Florida magazines, but the first is in debatable condition and second doesn't exist. BusterD (talk) 16:59, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - as per nom. I also agree with BusterD's assessment of the sourcing.  Does not meet WP:GNG. Onel 5969  TT me 20:29, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and others above. Certainly fails to meet WP:GNG. Could also be merged into a broader article list per BusterD. CycloneYoris talk! 22:04, 30 March 2023 (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.