Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daring Fireball

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 merge to John Gruber. j⚛e decker ^talk 15:56, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Daring Fireball

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

This article does not seem to meet the notability guidelines. Though the blog has some coverage, little seems to be in the form of reliable secondary sources. The article reads like a promotion for the blog and it's advertising opportunities, and is not based on any third-party source. Non-self-promoting information might be appropriate for the John Gruber article. Knight of Truth (talk) 14:18, 14 May 2014 (UTC) "[reply]

Weak keep. I found two reliable sources with what I'd call significant coverage: The Atlantic has an article with significant coverage about the topic, and Businessweek has an article about Gruber and Daring Fireball. The New Zealand Herald has an article about Gruber and the blog that's largely an interview. Also, this book from SAGE Publications and this book from Apress each provide at least a couple paragraphs about Daring Fireball. Boingboing has a short article on Daring Fireball's practice of not accepting user comments, though it's more of an editorial, with little usable factual information I'd factor in for GNG coverage.

Two two detailed Atlantic and Businessweek sources are the weakest possible amount of significant coverage I'd consider meeting WP:GNG, and usually I'd deem that insufficient, but I'm being lenient in this case due to the very large number of minor mentions in a wide variety of well known reliable sources, as well as many citations referencing the blog in books and scholarly articles. Often it will just be for a single quote from a post by Gruber on the blog, but it happens a lot. Just searching for "daring fireball" on news.google.com, which shows recent "news" sites that use the term, returns 90 results; not all are reliable, and all seem to be fairly minor (e.g. using a quote from the blog), but the frequency of citation in well known sources around the world, taken as a whole, do indicate a certain level of importance. So that influenced why I'd take the small number of detailed sources as adequate for meeting notability criteria.

Note that the current article relies way too much on primary sources, and does not cite independent sources, but that's not grounds for deletion, it's just an indication that the article needs serious work. Agyle (talk) 22:31, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do you feel about merging John Gruber with Daring Fireball, or vice versa? It is in many blogs' nature to be an extension of their author's person; it seems to me that they are hardly separate topics, which may be part of this article's problem. If we consider them jointly, the case for notability becomes more clear, but as separate articles one cannot lend notability to the other. Knight of Truth (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:46, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to John Gruber. DF has always been synonymous with JG. I looked through the sourcing I could find and his Internet personality is always the subject of the content, meaning that the website/blog does not have independent notability. In all honesty, it's perfectly fine as a section on his short article and if need be, it can always spin out summary style. czar ♔ 17:02, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I very weakly oppose merging; merging seems like a more sensible and better way to cover the topic, but I tend to view the question for an AFD as whether an article can be justified, rather than what would be best. I gather you looked at the same sources I did, and disagreed on notability, and I can understand the disagreement; Gruber is undeniably an inseparable part of any meaningful coverage about Daring Fireball. Agyle (talk) 03:46, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. I'm not sure which way the merge should go, but as Czar says above, John Gruber and Daring Fireball are essentially synonymous. They are certainly notable, but a single article is sufficient to cover them both. No preference on which title the article should have. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:19, 25 May 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.