Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Western Star (Bessemer, Alabama)


 * 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   merge to Trib Publications. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 01:39, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

The Western Star (Bessemer, Alabama)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No reliable sources indicating notability. Linked website has not been updated since 2009 and site does not appear to be for a print newspaper. The newspaper "The Western Star" is actually Canadian: http://www.thewesternstar.com/ Andrew327 07:10, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: There are several newspapers in North America that go by that name; I know of one in southwest Ohio. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 03:03, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  11:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  11:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  11:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete - fails WP:V as to its very existence (past or present) outside of a stale website. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  13:35, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: per WP:V rationale. Vrac (talk) 14:01, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. Trib Publications, the publisher of this paper, owns 38 papers in 4 states (as of April 2014) and is potentially notable.  See e.g.  .  I suggest merging and redirecting this article to a new one about the publisher. --Arxiloxos (talk) 14:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Weekly newspapers in the United States have generally been considered notable, especially if they have been around a while. I don't have a source for how old the Star is, but I remember seeing it sold in racks as far back as the late 1970s. It is a print newspaper published each Wednesday, but does not have a functioning website of its own — yeah, that's strange in this day and age, but that is at the direction of Trib's (elderly) owner, Bob Tribble. There is a Facebook page, though: . Maybe I could go shoot a photo of a copy of the print edition. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 03:03, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Inadequate references to reliable sources for notability.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  14:16, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SpinningSpark 11:17, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:V. APerson (talk!) 14:29, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Many newspapers (dozens?) were/are named "The Western Star"; the article creator did the appropriate thing by parenthesizing locale in the title. Pax 03:16, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: I can envision a small town weekly paper abandoning a costly website in favor of increasingly popular free social media. Pax 03:16, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Newspaper previously named The Bessemer Advertizer, and has been around since 1949. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Раціональне анархіст (talk • contribs)
 * Actually, under various names, it goes back to 1887 if one clicks through the predecessor links. Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 09:16, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * In that case, Keep. (Though it does appear the thing is running-on-fumes at present, even a defunct paper can historically notable).<b style="font-family:georgia; font-size:11pt; color:#BFA3A3"> Pax</b> 08:59, 29 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep: I'm sympathetic to the nomination, but the existence of predecessor papers back to the late 19th century which could be included, as well as some evidence of notability I could find (I added two cites to article), suggest to me this is a better candidate for improvement instead of deletion.--Milowent • <sup style="position:relative">has<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-3.2ex;*left:-5.5ex;">spoken 05:06, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that information about the paper should be preserved, so how about redirecting to an article about parent company Trib Publications? I think there are enough sources to cover the parent company, just not all of its publications.  Andrew327 11:17, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:05, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mr. Guye (talk) 02:06, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree that merging this to Trib Publications would be a good idea, but that article does not yet exist and in the meantime the information should be kept per WP:PRESERVE. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 03:54, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
 * , since Trib Publications has been created, do you think the article can be deleted now? APerson (talk!) 18:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Since we are re-using content from this article at Trib Publications, merge/redirect, not deletion, would be the indicated result.--Arxiloxos (talk) 19:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, merge, the existence of a parent article is not, by itself, justification for deletion. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 21:16, 10 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I just created Trip Publications to preserve all useful information from the article in question. Andrew327 15:00, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
 * , you mean Trib Publications? APerson (talk!) 19:13, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you, that is correct, good catch. Andrew327 20:31, 9 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.