Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Believer Magazine

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was redirect -- Francs2000 | Talk 16:25, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

The Believer Magazine
non-notable, vanity, and unsubstantiated Jdavidb 14:06, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Not a remotely helpful article in it's present state. --Scimitar parley 14:16, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to The Believer (magazine), as suggested below. --Scimitar parley 13:33, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete no context. Dunc|&#9786; 17:35, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete with no context, I don't see how it could be verified or expanded. Friday 19:42, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep after significant expansion. Redirect to The Believer (magazine) The Believer is a notable magazine made by McSweeney's, Dave_Eggers' publishing house.  I'll work on the article a bit later.  This is definitely not vanity, it's definitely verifiable (I have a few issues myself), and it's definitely notable.  MrBland 21:25, 27 July 2005 (UTC) (changed vote 17:43, 28 July 2005 (UTC))
 * If you expand it before the end of the end of the deletion period, drop a note off on my talk page and I'll look at changing my vote. --Scimitar parley 21:50, 27 July 2005 (UTC)


 * .Provisional keep, if this this is more than a sentence by close of play - otherwise deleteee --Doc (?) 22:57, 27 July 2005 (UTC) Redirect per Pyroclastic (good catch) --Doc (?) 00:32, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete notability not established. JamesBurns 06:27, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to The Believer (magazine). This is redundant.--Pyroclastic 08:40, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Pyroclastic. --Badlydrawnjeff 13:45, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll withdraw my initial vote to delete (does my submission count as a vote) and now vote for redirect as everyone else has described. Apparently the guy wasn't describing his own magazine after all (although that's a generic enough name it still wouldn't surprise me). Jdavidb 15:35, 28 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.