Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GayCalgary

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 redirect to List of LGBT publications. No prejudice on Bearcat's redirect v/r - T P 17:16, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GayCalgary

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

Doesn't appear to satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH or even the GNG. Google News did not turn up any hits. Delete or redirect to List of LGBT periodicals. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 22:51, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Even the article on Frontiers doesn't seem to meet the notability guidelines. My own search turned up nothing by independent, reliable, third party sources on this one, only links to the magazine itself, its Facebook page, and its Twitter feed. KDS4444^Talk 23:16, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of LGBT publications is probably a little better than deleting - Magazines often talk about notable things but sometimes the magazines aren't notable themselves or rarely get news coverage about themselves. My first Google News search found some minor mentions and my second one found one of the previous links. I found a minor mention in an about.com link. I also haven't found anything third-party for the Lily Tomlin edition as well as the Jann Arden one. Considering I had found some Canadian news coverage (three articles from canada.com), I thought I'd look at local newspapers Calgary Herald and Calgary Sun but found nothing relevant. TheWeal.com link was from January 2012 and even then, I question the notability of that website. Nothing to improve this article but at least a redirect leaves the door open for the future if this magazine should become notable. SwisterTwister talk 23:26, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:23, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:24, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:24, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of LGBT publications, this way possibly more research could be done in the future, — Cirt (talk) 01:24, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Can't more research always be done in the future? And a deletion decision is not a death sentence, it is a decision about notability which itself can always be reversed it notability can some day be established. Deletion is a closed door which can always be re-opened, not a nuclear bomb that destroys all future possibility. I think a redirect is a "un-bold" move given the lack of evidence of notability— once the subject of the article can stand on its own, let it; until then, let it not. KDS4444^Talk 23:18, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a particularly strong opinion about this one — for obvious reasons, I do try when I can to rescue LGBT-related Canadian topics, but this one's beyond even my mojo right now (although I'd be happy to hang onto it in my sandbox just in case some real sources eventually do turn up.) That said, I don't think redirecting it to List of LGBT publications is a helpful solution here, because that's an undifferentiated international list — it would be more appropriate, instead, to redirect to Media in Calgary. Bearcat (talk) 08:22, 14 November 2013 (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.