Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eliza (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 Keep (80% of votes to Keep) ~ ⇒TomTomN00 @ 08:03, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Eliza (magazine)

Eliza (magazine) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The company has not been considered notable under Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) as there is not much coverage of this company. A small article that appeared on The Phoenix (newspaper) (which was poorly written and laced with errors, that were corrected on the article's ending online), and a one-sentence blip on a blog called The Daily Beast is incidental coverage not worthy of notability. Morganmyrmo (talk) 10:04, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

• Comment. In addition to the article that was printed in The Phoenix (newspaper), there is also an article about it in The Salt Lake Tribune and another at San Antonio Express-News (...Bellessa, 27, is the editor-in-chief of ELIZA Magazine, a modest fashion publication launched in late June. Bellessa, who began modeling at age 4, has). The article you referenced from blog The Daily Beast was actually copied from Newsweek. ~dee^(talk?) 14:34, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. I found two other in-depth articles from Deseret News and Newsvine, which is part of MSNBC. The article does need expanding and new refs should be added, though. ~dee^(talk?) 14:45, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
• Comment. Another article I found from Brigham Young University. An interview about the mag coming out on the iPad published by Vocus. ~dee^(talk?) 14:59, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:58, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

• Keep - Two substantial footnotes showing in the piece, plus the one from Deseret News cited by dee above makes three, which should be sufficient to satisfy GNG. Carrite (talk) 20:47, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
• Keep - I declined the speedy deletion tags which were originally placed on it, based on the two sources that were used in the article at the time (Newsweek [although only a brief mention] and The Phoenix). I had told the editor that they were ineligable for CSD, and that if they disagreed they were free to take it to AfD, although the likely result would be keep (probably a case of WP:BEANS on my part). Unfortunately when all this was going on, I was pressed for time, and was unable to get into a discussion about the General Notability Guidelines, WP:BEFORE, etc. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 21:36, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
• Comment - References added to the article:

• "Magazine brings 'modesty to the masses'". Salt Lake Tribune. July 8, 2007. Retrieved March 28, 2012. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help) (subscription required)
• Warburton, Nicole (February 16, 2009). "Eliza magazine: Style and substance". Deseret News. Retrieved March 28, 2012. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
• Hussain Tania (May 3, 2010). "Capturing the World, One Frame at a Time". Newsvine. Retrieved March 28, 2012. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:03, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

• Keep - Topic passes WP:GNG, and has received significant coverage in reliable sources. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:09, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
• Delete - Sources stating that a company was formed is incidental coverage not worthy of notability, article is up for a means of promotion. WP:SOAP Morganmyrmo (talk) 05:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC) Article's about "garage" or very small local companies are typically unacceptable WP:ORG Morganmyrmo (talk) 05:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC) Article sources were a short-term interest as a result of public relations campaign WP:NRVE Morganmyrmo (talk) 05:30, 30 March 2012 (UTC) The foundation of notability requirements, which is compliance with major content policies, applies to all articles to ensure Wikipedia credibility. WP:WHYN Morganmyrmo (talk) 05:30, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
• Comment - Incidental coverage here not worthy of notability. Article's about "garage" or very small local companies are typically unacceptable WP:ORG. Morganmyrmo (talk) 23:15, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
• Comment - Is this even a magazine? There is nothing recent on their Web site , no statements on distribution, no dates regarding each issue. Looks like a ezine that prints hard copies on demand. Morganmyrmo (talk) 23:34, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
  • If it is a print magazine or ezine does not change the notability status, but in answer to your question, while I am unsure of the status now, the Deseret News piece says Her print-run is 10,000, and her magazine can be found in stores across the nation, including Barnes & Noble bookstores in Utah., so at one time it was.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 23:40, 30 March 2012 (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.