Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Obelisk (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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  14:12, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

The Obelisk (magazine)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not pass WP:GNG. Despite many references, I cannot find non-trivial coverage in reliable, independent sources. Many references are to the magazine's website itself or to Facebook posts. May be promotional in nature. Ganesha811 (talk) 22:58, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Ganesha811 (talk) 22:58, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Ganesha811 (talk) 22:58, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Ganesha811 (talk) 22:58, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

"The header featured a photograph of an orange-colored clouded sky with a sun setting behind the roof of a house and a moon crescent above it.[45] The logo was designed using the Ariosto font in orange color; the font (in the same orange color) has continued to be used for most of the Koczan-designed graphics on the website to this day. The header also featured the subtext Patet Non Pervium, a Latin phrase roughly translating to passing is not clear;" and "The Obelisk's header and logo received a make-over. The second logo was designed using the Latin font, italicized, in black color, with the i in Obelisk replaced by a tall, black, pointy obelisk.[49] The header featured a digitally illustrated sun eclipsed by the upper point of the obelisk from the logo, with the sun's orange and brown wavy rays spreading across the landscape, and casting black shadows from behind the logo over a grey-surfaced bottom."
 * Comment it is worth noting that taking out all the facebook.com references dropped the number of sources from 89 to 69. The page seems to have a lot of trivial information. For example:
 * This is the second of a number of AfDs involving articles by the same creator. As is true of their other articles, deletion is the best solution as repairing the article would take what amounts to a huge amount of time. --- Possibly (talk) 23:16, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , and the majority of what is left is sourced to The Obelisk! This and the other creations seem like possible UPE. Netherzone (talk) 23:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - Another bloated article where the content and citations are puffed up to give the appearance of notability. Most of the sourcing is primary, and most of that is to the Obelisk itself. Other sources are to blogs or other unreliable sources, or doesn't mention the subject. If sigcov in rs's are found I would consider changing my !vote, but at this point I can't see it passing GNG. Netherzone (talk) 23:00, 28 May 2021 (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.