Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Times of Assam (2nd nomination)

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. qedk (t 愛 c) 07:56, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Times of Assam

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Doesn't meet notability requirements of WP:WEB. Some of the references don't even mention the Times of Assam. -- haminoon (talk) 21:13, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't meet notability? How come? Still, many citations can be included from published books, though, I have used a few only. Which reference doesn't mention the Times of Assam? Can you please figure out? Or you are just using your seniority power?

I appeal against deletion. --;Preceding unsigned comment added by Arunudoy 02:19, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. and also, just a simple mentioning of name of the site (and, its news coverage) in books and journal doesn't qualify it to pass WP:GNG and WP:NWEB. -Hatchens (talk) 08:24, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What asked in notability? Citation? It will be a myth always.

OK, delete as you want to. But please clarify some of my doubts. What about this page Gaurav Arya? How much notable? And about Sri Lanka Guardian, Weekly Blitz?

-- 11:24, 24 June 2020 (UTC) Arunudoy 04:53, 24 June 2020 (GMT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arunudoy (talk • contribs)

Comment Arunudoy, kindly be polite to everyone and put your points as per the WP:GNG and other Wiki Project guidelines. -Hatchens (talk) 08:24, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My sincere apology. Actually I was misguided seeing these https://www.fastcompany.com/90471667/how-wikipedia-volunteers-became-the-webs-best-weapon-against-misinformation, https://thegrayzone.com/2020/06/10/wikipedia-formally-censors-the-grayzone-as-regime-change-advocates-monopolize-editing/ and https://consortiumnews.com/2020/06/15/uprising-narrative-control-operations-escalate-as-america-burns/ .

-- 11:37, 24 June 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arunudoy (talk • contribs)

Delete per nomitor and Hatchens. Note that the other articles mentioned by Arunudoy may be proposed for deletion if they wish, but this discussion page is only about this particular article as every article is judged on its own merits. JW 1961 Talk 21:57, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP As this says "...just a simple mentioning of name of the site (and, its news coverage) in books and journal doesn't qualify it to pass WP:GNG and WP:NWEB. -Hatchens (talk) 08:24, 24 June 2020 (UTC)", now what are the criteria for citation and editing? -- 06:03, 25 June 2020 (UTC) - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arunudoy (talk • contribs)

Comment: Kindly refer to WP:NMEDIA and also, again refer to WP:NWEB. And from the next time, try to sign your posts appropriately to avoid confusion. -Hatchens (talk) 05:14, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no assertion of notability; arguments in favour of keeping are nothing better than WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS Spiderone 19:34, 30 June 2020 (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.