Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SF Tech Beat

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:43, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SF Tech Beat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

no indication of meeting WP:notability guidelines. Short lived blog with very few google hits. Only sources given are either trivial (links to domain information or site rankings), or to the site itself. Google searches find very few hits and nothing of significance. noq (talk) 17:13, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what else to say really. Some people think it's important and some think its not. For most people in the city of San Francisco, SF Tech Beat made an impact on the direction of the technology scene, if I were to take a poll of 1000 people, I think its relevance would hover above 35% notability in a city of close to a million. Not everything is captured in the digital realm, and just because from your perspective its notwithstanding, especially due to your distance. It doesn't mean that it isn't notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seetler (talk • contribs) 18:12, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The subject is a technology blog, published from 2014 to 2016. Thus, I would expect whatever attention it received to have been noticed and captured within the digital realm. If this blog had been particularly notable within the San Francisco community, other bloggers and web sites would have commented about it on their blogs and web sites. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:06, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:27, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:27, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:27, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, unless someone can produce evidence of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines, which so far nobody has done. A Wikipedia editor speculating on what would be the outcome of a survey of people in San Francisco is not a reliable source, and even if we had evidence (not speculation), a lot of people thinking that something "made an impact" is not the basis on which Wikipedia's notability guidelines are based. The actual sources that we have are a whois record, a page not even mentioning SF Tech Beat (so far as I can see) and a traffic record for the site: none of those even begins to be relevant to Wikipedia's notability standards. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:49, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as there is no evidence that this passes WP:NWEB. Simply existing is not equivalent to notability. There needs to be secondary sources about the subject itself and which discuss the subject in detail. As few passing mentions are not good enough. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 02:24, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: this may well be an influential publication in the SF tech sphere, but I'm just not finding any WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS to warrant keeping it. Safehaven86 (talk) 03:08, 10 October 2016 (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.