Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UnRated 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 delete. Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:46, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UnRated Magazine[edit]

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

I found this article while attempting to determine if the website is reliable. While I think the site may qualify as a reliable source, it fails WP:NWEB. It's been tagged with sourcing issues for several years now, and my own searches have turned up nothing useable. The article itself consists mostly of external links. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 17:13, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 17:13, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:33, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No coverage in reliable sources. Hot Stop 06:16, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I didn't see any secondary independent coverage on the first page of either Google web or Google books. The reason to keep this is so that Wikipedia editors don't have to spend time searching to figure out what this topic is. [1] shows that this is a volunteer organization of 30 people. They have been around since 2001 and have an online archive of articles. Another reason to keep is that nominators should review the What links here before starting an AfD, and there is no advice here on what to do about the numerous red links a deletion would create. Nominators are also advised to consider WP:ATD, the alternatives to deletion. The technical policy issues here can be resolved by merging this material to a suitable target, and create one if necessary. Primary sources are WP:RS to report about themselves. Unscintillating (talk) 21:43, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,

Salvio

^{Let's talk about it!} 12:19, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:44, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No sources; all the external links are just pointers into the subject's own web site (or related sites), thus fails WP:RS. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:30, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources are WP:RS to report about themselves. Unscintillating (talk) 22:14, 29 March 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.