Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pigeon (Canadian publication)


 * 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. Tone 09:12, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

The Pigeon (Canadian publication)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:TOOSOON article about a brand new online media startup, not yet the subject of enough reliable source coverage about it to clear WP:NMEDIA. As always, websites are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist -- the notability bar is the degree to which the publication has been the subject of independent coverage in reliable sources analyzing the significance of its work. But three of the eight footnotes here are to the website itself, a fourth is a writer for the publication answering questions about it Q&A style in a YouTube video, and one is a design and communications firm's corporate blog, which means five of the eight footnotes are not valid support for notability at all. And of the remaining three, one is a very short blurb in a media industry trade publication, which is not substantive enough to help get this over WP:GNG. The closest thing to a strong source here is one article (repeated as two distinct footnotes) in a university journalism school magazine, which is not enough coverage to singlehandedly clinch notability all by itself if it's the best source on offer. It needs much better sources than this before it can be considered notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Bearcat (talk) 20:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 20:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 20:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per a very thoughtful nom. It's essentially a glorified blog at the moment. I struggle to see how a site that has existed for just over a month and has published maybe 50 articles could possibly be notable now. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 03:13, 13 August 2020 (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.