Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TheLiberal.ie

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. Discounting the SPAs, there is a consensus to delete the article. Nakon 23:45, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

TheLiberal.ie[edit]

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

Non-notable website Jadeslair (talk) 14:56, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:11, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not notable and a bit promotional.142.105.159.60 (talk) 23:12, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Attempts to whitewash seem to have finally calmed down. Website is reasonably prominent, no less prominent than a number of others. No storing opinion but see no need to delete at the moment.StringerNL (talk) 13:16, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable apart from the claims of blatant plagiarism and dodgy competitions, the article is suffering from a serious case of WP:COI editing. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 23:37, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The website itself is popular and the Facebook page was one of the most visited During December 2015. The claims of plagiarism are just that, claims. Most of the sources for the claims are anonymous and found on Twitter. The accusations of WP:COI are likewise just accusations based on the opinion of an editor. When I participated in the discussion one of those urging for the article's deletion accused me of being a sockpuppet (which I completely deny) so some of the critics are certainly very involved and volatile themselves. Barumba (talk) 14:31, 14 June 2016 (UTC) — Barumba (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

"The website is popular" - no proof, and irrlevant. It's actually outside the top 600 websites in Ireland. "Facebook page was one of the most visited during December 2015" - how exactly would you know this? No proof. Website fails WP:WEB. Note to closing admin: Barumba has made 20 edits in total to date. 19 of them have been to TheLiberal.ie, its talk page, or this AfD. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:09, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NewsWhip's website shows data to back up the claim that TheLiberal.ie is one of the top 8 Facebook pages in Ireland. It seems like you have some sort of personal vendetta against Leo Sherlock and theliberal.ie Surely you should leave that aside where Wikipedia is concerned? It's so blatantly obvious is laughable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imthenumberonefan (talk • contribs) 15:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC) — Imthenumberonefan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

And the alleged popularity of a page on Facebook is irrelevant to an article about a website. Alexa shows the actual page in question isn't notable in Ireland or elsewhere. Note to closing admin: Imthenumberonefan is a SPA that has made 79 edits, total. All 79 of them have been to TheLiberal.ie, its talk page, or this AfD. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:41, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A website that is nationally known in Ireland isn't notable in Ireland? What's your hidden agenda, Bastun? You keep questioning me and other users yet you're unwilling to answer any questions yourself. You have an obvious gripe against Leo Sherlock or possibly the ethos of theliberal.ie which is it, both? If so, here is the place to say it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imthenumberonefan (talk • contribs) 00:33, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't use that kind of rhetoric, please - it is inflammatory and against policy. GAB^gab 02:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's simple questions that arise from his erroneous editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imthenumberonefan (talk • contribs) 02:07, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I've really searched for good sources here, and can find very little indeed. Yes, NewsWhip claims it had the 8th most Facebook interactions, in Ireland only, in one particular month, six months ago. However, temporary Facebook popularity isn't notability (and indeed doesn't translate to website popularity either according to Alexa). Incidentally, whilst looking for sources on this, I found a lot of postings on social media suggesting that the Liberal's Facebook count had been wildly boosted by "like and share" competitions which, shall we say, you were unlikely to win... Laura Jamieson (talk) 07:17, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep TheLiberal.ie is consistently #1 in NewsWhip's results. It's among the most shared websites in Ireland on a daily basis. Any competitions is irrelevant to content share, just look at TheLiberal.ie Facebook page itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imthenumberonefan (talk • contribs) 13:33, 16 June 2016 (UTC) — Imthenumberonefan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Consistently #1 in NewsWhip's results? The source in the article says it was #8 in the rankings in one country for one month. Laura Jamieson (talk) 08:44, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's in terms of total interactions per month, I mean daily articles consistently shoot to #1 in Ireland, maybe you can't read properly or understand basic English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imthenumberonefan (talk • contribs) 15:33, 17 June 2016 (UTC) — Imthenumberonefan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Oh no, I'm quite able to read; unfortunately, you appear to be only able to read that which you agree with, whether true or, in this case, not. Or, more likely, in addition to being unable to sign your postings here, you simply don't understand the concept of reliable sources in Wikipedia. Some reading: WP:RS, WP:N, WP:V. Enjoy. Laura Jamieson (talk) 18:08, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question. I came here after one of the participants sought my admin advice on the dispute at the article, so I won't cast any !vote. But having read the article and the AFD with my admin hat on, I do have a question: does any of the participants in this discussion claim that theliberal.ie meets WP:GNG?

So far as I see in the article, the sources currently listed there do not meet the GNG test of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

Most of the references are to sources which are unreliable and/or not independent. Only two sources are arguably reliable: The Dublin Inquirer's article about TheLiberal.ie's plagiarism, and The Sun's revised version of the same article. Those are basically, the same piece.

Are there other sources which would establish notability per WP:GNG?

If not, then I see no basis for any claim that WP:GNG has been met. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete all manner of different web searches fails to find significant coverage of the website; just a few accusations of dubious behaviour which do not pass the notability threshold. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:34, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:43, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:43, 18 June 2016 (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.