Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J-14 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 keep. east.718 at 17:14, January 13, 2008

J-14 Magazine

J-14 Magazine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Delete Not notable per Wikipedia:Notability (media) or WP:WEB. Strothra (talk) 02:38, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete too much like an advert. Jelly the Supermodel (talk) 02:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, almost a speedy, no notability asserted. Lankiveil (talk) 04:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete *cough* advertisement *cough* No assertions of notability. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 04:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep OMG! Gross! Didn't anyone like, do their homework on this?!? J-14 is, like, soooo notable (see this New York Times article [1] which states that "For girls from 8 and 14, J-14 and M are two of the country’s best-read magazines"), and is additionally notable (and I am eternally ashamed to admit I know this) for "reporting" that Hannah Montana was pregnant (OMG!!!) (see [2] et al.) Also, per WP:NOT(media) "Notability is presumed for newspapers, magazines and journals that: (#5) are significant publications in ethnic and other non-trivial niche markets" (and the niche market of American tweens drive something like 84% of all U.S. spending). I'm going to stop now, as my level of knowledge of this subject is becoming soooooo frightening. Ψν^Psi_nu 15:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • • I have gone ahead and added these references. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing. Ψν^Psi_nu 15:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing." That cracked me up. --Strothra (talk) 16:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached after additional sources were added.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chick Bowen 05:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Article has been significantly improved since this AfD began. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I agree with improvements. All three refs from reliable sources actually mention J-14 Magazine so passes WP:N. Sting_au Talk 06:38, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Clearly meets notability. matt91486 (talk) 08:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete even with these alleged improvements, still reads like an advert. Mayalld (talk) 11:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 12:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - though not my cup of tea, meets notability. Agree a rewrite to make less advertorial though cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Props to Ψν. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:20, 7 January 2008 (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.