Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Houston Progressive Voice


 * 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   redirect to Houston Voice. m.o.p 04:50, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

The Houston Progressive Voice

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable, does not meet WP:NMEDIA, violates WP:CRYSTAL. Spammy. TransporterMan ( TALK ) 14:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Though not directly relevant, also see Dispute_resolution_noticeboard and related AfD discussion at Articles for deletion/Montrose Star. — TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 14:31, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Before Deleting, please consider this paper is revived version on the Houston Voice Formally owned by Window Media. This too has a long history dating to 1978 and was a major GLBT newspaper in the 1980s and 1990s. —  10:25, 1 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.213.16.162 (talk)
 * Hi ShreveNewsMan, could you clarify one point for me? If both The Houston Progressive Voice and the Montrose Star are derived from the Houston Voice of the 1980s and 1990s, then how exactly does the history of splits/mergers/takeovers work? Is this newspaper a split from the modern Montrose Star, a remnant from the old Houston Voice, or is there a more complicated history involved here? I think this would be useful for both this discussion, and for writing the actual encyclopaedia content. Regards —  Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 15:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Note, Houston Voice which is referenced in several article on Wikipedia should be redirected to The Houston Progressive Voice Both Montrose Star should remain (even as stubs) since they are the only 2 GLBT Newspapers to have ever existed in Houston, TX. — ShreveNewsMan unsigned comment added by 74.213.16.162 (talk)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:06, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:07, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:07, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. I haven't found any coverage of this new paper at all, and the "under construction" condition of its website suggests that it may not even be publishing yet.  I also don't see any basis for treating this as an actual continuation of the Houston Voice, which had different ownership, although it's possible that a mention of this paper as a quasi-successor could be justified in the Montrose Star article (if it is kept). --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:58, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The same argument can be said about the Montrose Star as well. The original Montrose Star changed its name in 1978 to the Houston Voice, the Houston Voice ran until 2009. The Montrose Star was revived by Henry McClurg in April of 2009, and that was actually a name change from the Montrose G.E.M. It went through 2 ownerships before even getting to the current owner GLYP Media/Laura Villagran. So this to is a "quasi-successor" of the original Montrose Star in 1974. Teh 2009 Montrose Star was a few months before the Houston Voice officially went out of business. --ShreveNewsMan (talk) 22:34, 1 December 2011 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.213.16.162 (talk)
 * Keep, noteworthy publication due to its history, coverage in secondary sources, research value, encyclopedic nature, and educational and societal value. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:54, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Cirt, could you clarify which coverage in secondary sources you are referring to? It seems that from your comment you are considering this newspaper as part of the Montrose Star–Houston Voice progression, but I haven't seen any convincing evidence that we shouldn't consider it a totally separate newspaper, and it appears that this particular newspaper team hasn't even started publishing yet. Moreover, if it is a part of this progression but not a notable paper in its own right, then the appropriate thing to do would seem to be merging with (or redirecting to) Montrose Star/Houston Voice. Your comments would be much appreciated. —  Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 15:02, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I would suggest merging them all, then changing the main article to the Houston Voice the Houston Voice is main most notable paper here. It was around for over 20 years, the Montrose Star was only from 1974 to 1978 then 2009 to present. Montrose Ste should redirect to Houston Voice, and just redirect The Houston Progressive Voice to Houston Voice as well.


 * 'FYI The US Library of Congress just assigned the The Houston Progressive Voice the ISSN's (Print) ISSN 2164-9243 and (Online) ISSN 2164-9251.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.198.63.94 (talk) 19:18, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Houston Voice where the historical progression of names is captured already. Redirect The Houston Progressive Voice to Houston Voice as the most known name. Keep Houston Voice. I do think that the pub is notable, but separate articles are not needed. If we conclude that the present version of the Montrose Star is a separate newspaper, I do not think that it is independently notable, Library of Congress recognition or not. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  19:26, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Houston Voice, per Xymmax's reasoning. --DGaw (talk) 01:37, 11 December 2011 (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.