Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Patriot (newspaper)


 * 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. Nakon 03:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

The Patriot (newspaper)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No coverage in sources independent of the subject (non-Stony Brook). No more than passing mentions, if any, in major databases LexisNexis, ProQuest, Google Books. There are no worthwhile redirection targets, so deletion is the best option. czar ⨹   22:41, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 1 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, thank you very much to for already doing the due diligence here, and attempting to find additional research in the archival databases mentioned, above. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:36, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge reliably sourced content using neutral wording to Stony Brook University, it can be verified that the subject of this AfD did in fact exist, but it appears to be defunct. That being said the subject does not appear to meet WP:GNG, and as it falls withing the scope of Stony Brook University, verified content could be covered in that article.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:33, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Being that the only two sources in the article are both dead links, and ostensibly were primary sources, I'm not sure what you see to be the reliable sources here. In any event, this is not a major part of the university that needs to be covered in its meager student life section and there is no actual, sourced content to merge. czar ⨹   02:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I provided at least one link, and the university itself, although secondary, is a reliable source. There also appears to be several other defunct newspaper publications, that would be worth mentioning in the student life section.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:42, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * There are also multiple mentions in the Stony Brook Press, and sources such as this.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:49, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * We could also write about their cheerleading team, which will have similar coverage. The idea is that it has as much coverage as many other student orgs and what those all have in common is a dearth of secondary (non-affiliated) source coverage—in short, that they were both too inconsequential for outside coverage and for mention in the article. And I don't see a good reason to forgo that. That's all I have to add on this point. czar ⨹   12:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, § FreeRangeFrog croak 22:05, 7 February 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 07:39, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - We need to treat newspapers with kid gloves: a comprehensive encyclopedia needs comprehensive coverage of them. HERE is an article from the Stony Brook Statesman from 2008, "Stony Brook Republicans Hide Political Support," dealing in some significant measure with The Patriot as a conservative organizing center at the university. THIS is coverage of the launch of The Patriot by the Stony Brook Independent, the official campus newspaper. A SHORT BIT listing The Patriot at Snipview's "Student newspapers published in New York."  That's the result of a quick Google. There is sufficient material out there for a GNG pass, in my opinion. Carrite (talk) 13:13, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why student newspapers need to be treated with kid gloves as if they get some exemption from the current notability guidelines, but just to confirm, you're saying that coverage in two other student newspapers (the Statesman and the Independent) and a snippet on Snipview ("the illustrated magazine anybody can edit", that is actually just a verbatim copy of the WP page) together constitute significant coverage? Doesn't quite add up for me. czar ⨹   03:00, 18 February 2015 (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.