Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Four Quarters 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. Cutting through the SPA's we;re left with a consensus that this magazine is not notable Courcelles 19:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

The Four Quarters Magazine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability except some in-passing mentions. Does not meet WP:GNG. Randykitty (talk) 10:27, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Hi Randy, Here are a few evidences: Listed in the website of Rutgers, New Jersey http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/pbonline.html Listed in Wiki pages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitoo_Das https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xu_Xi The page is for a free literary magazine that does not charge its contributors. Please do not delete the page. Best, Goirick
 * Comment Sorry, but none of those links provide evidence of any notability. --Randykitty (talk) 12:15, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 12:17, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 12:17, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Please do not delete If every wikipedia page that is not notable is deleted, then I presume that the pages which are not deleted as of now or the pages over which there is no debate can be termed as notable? Four Quarters Magzine's name has been mentioned in more than two wiki pages of notable authors like Nitoo and Xuxi. Besides there are interviews and Reviews written in websites that have notable Wikipedia pages like Duotrope and Prairie Schooner. If almost all the sources that we have suggested below are reliable and notable (in wiki's definition) why then, should you pitch this page for speedy deletion? I seriously hope you reconsider your decision. I dont have any personal interest in popularizing the magazine, we don't get any revenue out of it. It is a literary mag and aimed at fostering art and creativity. Just wanted people around the world to know about it for the love of poetry sake. I hope you will understand. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.176.222.204 (talk) 17:25, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  — 122.176.222.204 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:04, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Does not receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources.  Approximately 100 hits on Google.   It seems a bit too early to create an article at this time. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment There are atleast a 1000 unique hit in a week as per our Wordpress Hit counter plugin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goirick (talk • contribs) 10:09, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep As quoted before,This article has direct mentions of the magazine. Sunday Guardian is an independent and a reliable source that adheres to Wikipedia's notability norms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.18.74.30 (talk • contribs) — 103.18.74.30 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment As said before, that is just an in-passing mention, which hardly contributes to notability at all. --Randykitty (talk) 10:45, 27 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep I am a reader of TFQM. It's one of the best literary initiatives that has come accross in recent years in India. I request all senior wiki members to keep the page. — Preceding unsigned  16:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Exactly what I am saying "has mentions in a magazine/website article that contributes to notability. Since that website that mentions it adheres to Wikipedia's notability norms. 182.64.25.8 (talk) 16:43, 27 December 2013 (UTC) Goirick(talk)
 *  Keep  check out the search results in google scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22The+Four+Quarters+Magazine%22) for notability — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.162.52.204 (talk) 17:19, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Also please check this link http://soniaraowrites.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/online-literary-magazines-decoded-the-four-quarters-magazine/ for notability — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.162.34.0 (talk) 18:46, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Please do not delete There are enough evidences in the web that it is trusted, free, reliable magazine and that contributes to notability. Please do not delete the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goirick (talk • contribs) 18:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Also please check Duotrope link https://duotrope.com/market_7909.aspx. Do not delete for the sake of it. It is a good magazine. We aren't really boasting about it in our wiki page. We are just stating it's mere existence. It helps both the writers and us. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.64.25.8 122.176.198.250 (talk) 09:13, 28 December 2013 (UTC)(talk) 19:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep The Four Quarters Magazine featured in Indian Newspaper Daily News and Analysis (DNA) 20,Oct 2013. Please check the link below as a proof of notability and reliability: "The Four Quarters Magazine, In Priase of the Past" http://epaper.dnaindia.com/story.aspx?id=53781&boxid=11014&ed_date=2013-10-20&ed_code=820082&ed_page=9 —  comment added by Goirick (talk) 09:58, 28 December 2013
 * Comment : you have !voted multiple times, struck the "delete" !vote by NPR, and just edited an IP's comment, suggesting that you are the same person as at least some of the IPs !voting here (some of which have !voted more than once, too). Please familiarize yourself with our AfD guidelines and WP:SOCK, as this kind of behavior will vey rapidly lead you to be blocked from editing. You're new here, so you may not have been familiar with these guidelines and therefore I have not undertaken any action. However, now you have been made aware of these issues, I will ask an uninvolved admin to block you if this behavior continues. Please also note the template on the top of this page about AFD not being a vote. None of the "keep" votes up till now are policy based or bring significant sources and are likely to all be ignored by the closing admin. Again, read the guidelines about what constitute effective arguments so that your participation in this discussion may be more constructive. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 10:28, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment :I agree I edited a few entries made by others only to make the arguments come across more clearly and that some of my own comments were made while I wasn't online resulting separate IPs.But I hope you trust me when I say some are genuine Ips of different users. I am sorry if my actions did not adhere to wiki guidelines. I am not here to show majority vote or fight for the sake of it with you. I am sure u have a basis for which you are arguing for deletion of the page.However, all I am trying here is to defend my case.Please do not jump into conclusions "None of the "keep" votes up till now are policy based or bring significant sources and are likely to all be ignored by the closing admin." without clicking the links. I request you to go through them with a unbiased, non deletionist, like you claim in your user profile :).Please consider the last source mentioned "The Four Quarters Magazine featured in Indian Newspaper Daily News and Analysis (DNA) 20,Oct 2013. Please check the link below as a proof of notability and reliability: "The Four Quarters Magazine, In Priase of the Past" http://epaper.dnaindia.com/story.aspx?id=53781&boxid=11014&ed_date=2013-10-20&ed_code=820082&ed_page=9 " I am not here to fight really brother. Please go through the links we all have shared under keep vote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goirick (talk • contribs)


 * Well, now that you know the rules, perhaps you can strike your extra !votes. As for the links you provided, of course I have looked at them. If I thought that any of them would establish notability, I would withdraw the deletion nomination immediately. However, not even the DNA link helps, as press releases or this kind of announcement do not show any notability. --Randykitty (talk) 12:02, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * : If the newspaper published the CFS without us sending them doesn't it qualify for notability? Its an independent source, reliable and unbiased, so it cannot be influenced by any other entity.


 * Delete or WP:Incubate until the authors learn Wikipedia protocol. Difficult to tell notability for a magazine as there's so much tertiary fluff created when a publication is a subject but I'd guess it's not notable given that the only two sources referenced in the body of the article mention the publication only in passing. Given the fuss over keeping the article, I'd suspect WP:COI which is ironic given that they can't follow editorial policy. Gm545 (talk) 15:07, 2 January 2014 (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.