Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Oxford Student

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:44, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Oxford Student[edit]

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

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (periodicals) requirement. Student newspaper at a major university, but I don't see what makes it pass said policies. It doesn't seem to have any major impact, etc. Yes, it won some kind of an award ([1]), but that award doesn't seem major. This kind of entity doesn't deserve an independent aticle, IMHO, but at best a brief mention (at Oxford University, perhaps, that it exits. Regarding circulation, please note that circulation numbers are not considered relevant to notability, since it is difficult to compare them and say what is high, what is low (just like, let's say, the size of an organization is not a criteria for notability of an organization). Also, circulation numbers for this publication are sourced to primary source that has a clear purpose of advertising/promotion, so their reliability is hardly full-proof (another reason most data on circulation, as self-reported number which inflation is in the interest of the reporting source, is generally dubious). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:51, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Coverage in reliable sources shown in the article, more in Google searches, passes GNG. And I might add that I do not think it's a desirable goal to reduce Wikipedia's coverage of bona fide media sources.--Arxiloxos (talk) 17:12, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you elaborate which coverage is reliable? Because almost all coverage is from self-published sources, i.e. the said student newspaper itself.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 21:27, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - There are multiple references in the footnotes to "real" newspapers, although some of these links appear to be broken. In addition, Google shows coverage of the paper's activities in, for example, the BBC [2], The Guardian [3], The Register [4], Times Higher Education [5][6], and more. --Arxiloxos (talk) 22:13, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The Guardian award is sufficient to pass Periodicals criterion 2. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 10:54, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The Oxford Student, very much like the Cherwell or the Isis, is a point of reference of student life at Oxford. Deleting this article would not only be illogical, considering that its circulation is larger than say the most-circulated national newspaper in Liechtenstein (which obviously has an article too), but it would also bring immense discomfort to those who research the third oldest university in the world, its unique student culture, and its history. For all such researches the student media within the University are an invaluable source of information. I would furthermore like to stress out that this article has been suggested for deletion by the same person who has on multiple occasions suggested the deletion the Oxford University Russian Club's page, in what seems to be a deliberate attempt to discredit the article's references, which include "The Oxford Student". User:J31ox 11:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by J31ox (talk • contribs)
Keep. Enough coverage in reliable sources, BBC, Telegraph, to show notability Aloneinthewild (talk) 13:25, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources provided are quite acceptable. Maybe the nom can consider withdrawing this Afd. Lourdes 05:58, 1 February 2017 (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.