Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tattoo teen newspaper


 * 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 NO CONSENSUS. J I P | Talk 15:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Tattoo teen newspaper
nn, vanity, no citation --- Delete. - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 16:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as basically nonsense. — Mets 501 (talk) 16:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's not nonsense. It's making an assertion, without any backup to it's claim. (Remember, patent nonsense is incoherent.) It might have been created as an attack, but I removed the one POV sentence (of two). Anyway, there's no good claim to notability, and it appears to be a WP:HOAX. alpha Chimp  laudare 16:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC) I am withdrawing my opinion until further evidence/reasoning is established.  alpha Chimp  laudare 18:22, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment, however it's neither nonsense nor a hoax, as it has a website . As for a claim to nobility, it seems it has won alot of awards, see the link at the bottom of the homepage. hateless 17:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: The problem is that the awards are local-based...? - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 18:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

weak keep- little paper, big heart
 * Keep: Does not appear to be a hoax, and does have some measure of notability. Article does need to provide sources. Rohirok 18:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per the listing of awards. I don't see a claimed circulation, though.  I'd like to see what an expanded article on this would be like, and feel it should be given the opportunity to get that far. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  18:18, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - this is one of those articles where the writer seems to have wanted it to be deleted. I certainly don't blame any of "delete" nominators for seeing a hoax or nonsense here, in either the original version or the current stub.  My two cents:  First, the article is currently eminently deletable; second, I'd put the writer on notice I think there's a notable and worthy topic here, but it needs to be written ASAP.  I've verifiied some of the awards on a national level here (warning:  PDF file), so per hateless I'm satisfied as to notability.  Tychocat 10:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Right now it is just a local paper with no notability.  If we get sources for State or even better, national awards then it should stay.  Vegaswikian 17:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Fascinating discussion. I found a few sources for national awards for this paper. The Suburban Newspaper Association awards list is here: http://www.suburban-news.org/index.cfm?method=contests.dsp_main. The Quill and Scroll Society's award list is here: http://www.uiowa.edu/~quill-sc/ContestResults/2004%20WP/winners.html and http://www.uiowa.edu/~quill-sc/ContestResults/2005%20WP/winners.html. Here's a story from the Hammond (La.) Star about another national award: http://www.hammondstar.com/articles/2006/05/13/kids_shine/0090.txt. This is a 2004 story in The Bristol (Conn.) Press about another national award: http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=10840967&BRD=1643&PAG=461&dept_id=10486&rfi=8. This year's Connecticut Society of Professional Journalism awards are here: http://www.ctspj.org/docs/2006-contest-docs/SPJ2006ResultsAPWeb.doc.
 * Keep If it's had national awards, it's notable.--Runcorn 17:28, 6 August 2006 (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.