Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al-Kawsar

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 no consensus. (NPASR) (non-admin closure) Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (discourse) @ 20:47, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Kawsar

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

Can't identify the significance Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 04:22, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - Over a decade, the magazine has been found in almost all book stores and hawkers (I am introduced with this monthly since my boyhood). I strongly suggest to keep it. Sharif uddin (talk) 14:15, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I never heard of this magazine. But the page needs proper references. With a dead link and a search result ref, at present state, it can not express its notability. So either it can be properly cited or delete the page. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You need to show some coverage in reliable sources. A magazine can exist (WP:ITEXISTS) and be popular (WP:ITSPOPULAR) but neither are in themselves reasons to keep an article. They do make it more likely that the magazine has coverage, but it's not a guarantee of coverage and there are a lot of very popular magazines out there that wouldn't pass notability guidelines. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:02, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:18, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:18, 4 December 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 19:06, 9 December 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, Dusti ^{*Let's talk!*} 04:15, 16 December 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.