Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Memoria Pichilemina

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. j⚛e deckertalk 03:13, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Memoria Pichilemina[edit]

Memoria Pichilemina (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about small-town history web-page created 1 year ago by Wikipedia user:Diego Grez (aka. Kuñall and MisterWiki). No evidence of notability (WP:N) except one-time mention in a few local newspapers. (this might also possibly be a case of WP:COI, but lets discuss relevance here first). Sietecolores (talk) 20:17, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - the CoI seems to be irrelevant here. Suggesting an article to be created by others via WP:Requested articles is precisely what we suggest editors with a CoI do. Although Diego Grez may have suggested it, he never edited the page. Huon (talk) 21:16, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The nominator has already made clear I am related to the article's subject, I founded the website, and so I am not voting in this discussion, to avoid COI accusations. However, I think that the website satisfies the web content notability guideline. Why? It conforms to the policy on verifiability to reliable sources, yes, it does. There are two major sources in the article, the recent articles of El Expreso de la Costa and La Voz de la Región. Both news articles are one-page-long, they are not simple "mentions". We do have other articles on local Chilean websites too, like WikiLosRíos, for example. To finish, it's important to mention I'm not even making money out of the website, it's non commercial and its content is released under a libre license. This will be my sole comment, because I don't really want a COI outcry, it's the least thing I would like to experience here on Wikipedia now. Küñall (talk) 21:21, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Verifiability and one-time mention by tiny-local newspaper (I suppose now in good faith that Diego Grez has no connection with people from Pichilemu News or El Expreso de la Costa, albiet that is difficult in such small town) does makes Diego Grez's website notable. For that to happen it should have perhaps one of these..: 1) recieved some national/international recognition/prize, 2) be mentioned more than 1 time by a large national newspaper, 3) considerable traffic. Sietecolores (talk) 22:51, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • It does not say anywhere in the notability guidelines that a website has got to be mentioned more than 1 time by a large national newspaper for it to be qualified for a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia:Notability_(web)#Criteria states notability for web-based content is "based on meeting one of the following criteria":
      • "The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. This criterion includes reliable published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles, books, television documentaries, websites, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations"
    • It complies with that criteria. There are two in-depth articles on the website, it passes the guideline. Küñall (talk) 22:57, 27 May 2014 (UTC) (By the way, this will be my actual last comment here.)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kuñall/Diego Grez, it does not complies with the criteria because its lacks significant coverage (WP:N) and you should refrein from making further comments because of WP:COI. Sietecolores (talk) 13:24, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note. I have removed material relating to the founder from the article - if the website is notable, it is for the content, not the founder, and I can see no justification whatsoever for such off-topic detail. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:33, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The material you deleted contained information that showed that the founder/owner/administrator Kuñall works at one of the newspapers used to "establish coverage" (a clear case of WP:COI). Besides that I insists in that coverage is not large enought, no large nationwide newspaper has covered mentioned Memoria Pichilemina, and the local newspapers have done so only once. Memoria Pichilemina has also not recived any significant recognition or prize. Sietecolores (talk) 23:45, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly, there appears to be a clear COI - as I have made clear at the thread on the noticeboard. It isn't however necessary to retain off-topic material in the article to demonstrate this, as it is all visible in the history. As for whether the article (minus the off-topic material) deserves deletion, I've so far voiced no opinion either way, and should probably avoid doing so, given my previous interactions with Kuñall. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:54, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Sources are local press only and therefore insufficient to demonstrate notability per WP:GNG. ukexpat (talk) 14:43, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Coverage not enough coverage. Only local newspapapers (connected to the owner adn creator Kunall). Website locks significant recognition or prize. Sietecolores (talk) 14:41, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Since you nominated this article for deletion, it's unnecessary that you vote. I do write for El Expreso... but I have no relation to La Voz de la Región, which is published by a company from San Fernando. Küñall (talk) 15:31, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Local press coverage only ,fails wp:GNG & WP:WEB. 94.195.46.205 (talk) 06:02, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Memoria_Pichilemina&oldid=1068852724"