Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R/AskHistorians

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 and Move. Moved to AskHistorians (non-admin closure) Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 14:38, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

R/AskHistorians[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

R/AmItheAsshole was deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R/AmItheAsshole). it is very similar to this. There is not much significant coverage about it, and the few pieces written about it are not enough to meet WP:GNG. There is not significant coverage, just a few articles that are about Reddit in general, or obscure articles that don't meet the bar of GNG. I-82-I | TALK 07:06, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep seemed to be some articles from legitimate RS, discussing the worth of the site, making this noteworthy. A number of them *feature this thread* specifically, from what I can see, they aren't just about Reddit generally Deathlibrarian (talk) 08:22, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The nominators rationale does not hold up, celebreties do not show up on r/AskHistorians nor is another sub being deleted relevant. This specific sub has coverage in reliable sources for its own merits.★Trekker (talk) 18:10, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, I agree, simnply because one article on what appears to be a completely different reddit sub (and one of little note) was deleted, doesn't mean this article is invalid if this reddit sub is notable Deathlibrarian (talk) 00:36, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Plenty of significant coverage cited in the article, to which we can add these two peer-reviewed papers that discuss the site extensively, [1][2] two theses about it,[3][4] and many more mentions in Google Scholar results.[5] – Joe (talk) 07:34, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per Joe Roe. Krakkos (talk) 13:27, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps Rename to AskHistorians. The initial "r" looks like an operator, not a name. If it really does have 1,000,000 subscribers, I would ahve thought it was notable. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Enough reference to keep it on wikipedia.Iitianeditor (talk) 17:06, 27 August 2020 (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.