Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hazeley Herald


 * 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 Speedy delete CSD#G7. Vanamonde (talk) 17:47, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

The Hazeley Herald

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

As noted by User:Largoplazo, only ten Google hits, nothing even resembling notability. Non-notable student publication. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:08, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per reasoning explained by nom.  General Ization  Talk   01:13, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

I would first like to thank you for following up on your claim in such a civil and straightforward fashion. I would like to first provide context as to why it was made. I am a student of the academy and me and a friend were up tonight (11:00-12:00 UTC) looking at the school page. My friend vandalised the page, in a fairly minor fashion and I set about to fix it. I did it swiftly and noticed that our internal paper had a reference, but no page. As a learning exercise, I took it upon myself to quickly dot one up. It only took 5 or so minutes, because I already knew what there was to know, as an internal. I am fully aware that the page has little significance outside of our little school, but I can promise as a student for 4 years at the academy that "The Hazeley Herald" was a real thing, that was printed. Unfortunately, as stated it lost significance quickly and after a few years it ceased completely as it became too expensive to run.

If this has not persuaded you of the fact that the article should maintain its existence, then I shall have to concede and delete the page. This will mean however, that on the main page nobody will ever be able to see the story of what became of the student piece.

AMassiveNerd (01:23UTC)
 * See WP:N for information about the notability policy that we are discussing here. The publication would have to meet the general notability guidelines at WP:GNG, and, I'm afraid, it certainly doesn't. Mere existence, even significance within a small group of people but not outside of it, is insufficient for inclusion. Largoplazo (talk) 06:18, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

I shall have to retire for the night where I am, continue to post your points here if you want to and I'll check them tomorrow. AMassiveNerd — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMassiveNerd (talk • contribs) 01:42, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable student news outfit. Unencyclopaedic. CalzGuy (talk) 05:29, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete based on what Robert McClenon noted above that my reason had been in my earlier PROD nomination. Largoplazo (talk) 06:14, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Ok guys, you have made your case. The article will be deleted now. Just have to figure out how to do that, new to wikipedia. AMassiveNerd — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMassiveNerd (talk • contribs) 13:37, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Deletion notice (db-author) made. AMassiveNerd — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMassiveNerd (talk • contribs) 13:43, 29 January 2017 (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.