Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bronx Times


 * 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 02:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

The Bronx Times

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails the general notability guideline: Article does not include demonstrably independent and reliable sources offering significant coverage, and a BEFORE search did not produce any such sources. PROD'ed page undeleted per this charming request from the page creator and apparent owner of the website in question. — swpb T 13:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. — swpb T 13:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. — swpb T 13:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:43, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:43, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

The information provided in my article, The Bronx Times, states ONLY facts. Nothing postulates, that a person's or entity's or object's existence depend on whether or not somebody, unknown who, has made a reference to that existence. Maybe I have to give you access to my mailbox, for you to see the hundreds e-mails I get daily from the NYC Mayor's Office, from various NY Senators, from Public Advocate James' Office, from the Press Office of NYC Comptroller, from Manhattan District Attorney's Office, from the Press Office of the Bronx Borough President, from a myriad of colleges and universities where students from Bronx study and achieve, from tens of local charitable, religious, civic, etc. organizations and private persons, and last but not least from the White House Press Office. Say the word and I will let you have a look. If you have suggestions how to change the article, make those suggestions, but you have no right to delete my article just because SOMEONE has not mentioned The Bronx Times somewhere.Milosheff (talk) 23:00, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
 * When it comes to Wikipedia, there is no my article. Editors who create/edit articles and the subjects they are written about do not have any ownership rights over an article. Editing is done through collaboration with other editors and through consensus. Wikipedia is not a free web host for individuals/organizations to post "their" article or to use as a proxy website. All articles are evaluated in accordance to relevant policy and guidelines, and those which do not comply with these policies and guidelines are sometimes needed. One of the main reasons articles are deleted it because their is no evidence the subject satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Basically, articles are only supposed to reflect what multiple, independent reliable sources say about the subject; therefore, for an article to be suitable for a stand-alone Wikipedia article is is expected to have received significant coverage in such sources. Wikipedia notability is not the same as existence, and a subject Wikipedia can not be made Wikipedia notable by simply editing article content. It makes no difference how many daily emails the paper gets or whatever else is in your mailbox; rather, you need to show how the paper satisfies Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). If you are able to do that, the article will likely be kept; if not, then there's a chance it will be deleted. If you can show that the paper has received anything more than trivial mentions in multiple independent reliable sources, then please add those sources as citations to the article or add them links to them on this discussion talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:52, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:44, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Concur with nom. No references, no indications of meeting GNG. MB 02:20, 19 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.