Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/News media

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to News media. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|News media|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to News media. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/News media/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also Internet-related deletions and publications for deletion. For news events, use Events-related deletions.

News media

Anti-Bangladeshi disinformation in India

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

Fails WP:NOTABILITY and WP:RS. Most of the Sources come from local Indian and Bangladeshi news websites and are usually misinterpreted and unreliable. Other users at the talk page suggested this might be WP:SOAPBOX. Information that is properly sourced could easily be merged into a different article, SKAG123 (talk) 19:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

pinging @Nahian @Tamzin @Za-ari-masen @Kautilya3 @Xoocit SKAG123 (talk) 19:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Bangladesh, and India. Heart ^(talk) 19:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Local sources can not be the reason to delete the article. To say or prove those sources are unreliable and misinterpreted, you need to explain why and how they are unreliable and misinterpreted. If not, then the deletion discussion will not make any sense. I suggest to produce source analysis for the commenters so that we can reach a decision. Mehedi Abedin 20:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article should be improved upon, but it very clearly meets WP:Notability guidelines. Firecat93 (talk) 20:56, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Strong. I agree that more information, paragraphs and references need to be added to the article. But I don't understand why the article didn't pass the criteria of notability. The article received considerable media coverage and undoubtedly exceeded WP:N. ~ Deloar Akram (Talk • Contribute) 21:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I have been arguing this at the talk page, which hasn't yet been concluded. Nevertheless it is fair to say that this is an over-the-top WP:NOTNEWS article, hastily put together for axe-grinding purposes. All countries have their share of substandard media. Even in India there is a constant refrain about how the western media portray India in negative light. But that does not mean that we go and start creating pages like anti-X disinformation in Y. The present page is only about coverage of the recent "revolution" in Bangladesh, not any general coverage about Bangladesh. While it is true that there were some alarmist tendencies in some sections of the Indian media in this coverage, the claim of "anti-Bangladeshi" is completely unevidenced. Even the "disinformation" part is overblown. Most of what is covered is misinformation rather than disinformation. The creators of the page didn't even seem to know the difference between the two.

There is also plenty of WP:OR in labelling any inaccurate reporting as "disinformation", even though no WP:RS has called it as such. Many sources are also misrepresented, the comments made by experts are cherry-picked and the fact that there are indeed rational reasons for the alarmism has been suppressed.

Frankly I don't think it is worth my time or any one else's time to "improve" this page.It is faulty in its very conception. It is best to get rid of it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Almost all the references used here are from Bangladeshi news media, and none of them have independently identified the claim that Indian media is spreading false information. I will show you some random local references that cite entities like the "Chief Advisor's Press Wing," "Rumor Scanner BD," etc. But the "Chief Advisor's Press Wing" and "Rumor Scanner BD" are directly associated with the government. This implies that they are political. In this way, it completely loses neutrality. Moreover, there are many aspects here that do not support the sources of information. The interesting aspect is that several news pieces from Indian media have been used as references here to claim that Indian media spreads false information. ClearJourney (talk) 21:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)strike sock -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Rumor Scanner BD is an independent fact-checking organization based in Bangladesh with no affiliation to the government. The CA Press Wing is the press wing of the head of the government. Also, note that this account was registered only a few hours ago and shares the same interests as w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CosmLearner. —Yahya (talk • contribs.) 22:06, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: "Chief Advisor's Press Wing' and 'Rumor Scanner BD' are directly associated with the government"—this claim of yours has no basis. Rumor Scanner BD has also conducted fact-checking against Dr. Muhammad Yunus, the Chief Advisor of the current interim government, and has regularly fact-checked information regarding Bangladesh's former Prime Minister in the past. There is no credible source to support the claim of its connection with the government. However, nothing better can be expected from a banned user. Immediately after creating a new account, you began making unconstructive edits to articles related to Bangladesh and recent movements. Vengeance • Talk 22:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article meets WP:N due to considerable media coverage and addresses a significant topic in disinformation studies. While it needs editorial improvement, such as refining sources and removing sensationalism, deletion is unnecessary. Issues like WP:SOAPBOX or WP:OR can be resolved through revisions, making the page worth retaining and enhancing.--DelwarHossain (talk) 00:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia does not require entries that lack coverage of notable or major incidents. Much of the article is filled with rumors spread via social media, which is a common occurrence during significant events—in this case, the resignation of Sheikh Hasina and the subsequent violation. Other related articles also require cleanup due to the excessive use of buzzwords such as "disinformation," "propaganda," and "campaign," without reliable sources or citations to substantiate these terms. I don't think that some country's media or public perception of another country should have a separate wikipedia article. It was created during a wave of Bangladeshi activity on the wiki which has led to multiple other pages with WP:UNDUE and WP:RECENCY issues.

Recent Bangladesh-related articles, especially those created during the time of the protests and fall of the government, also require significant improvement and suffer from similar issues. There are articles with bias issues, such as the 2024 attack on the Bangladesh Assistant High Commission in India and International_Society_for_Krishna_Consciousness#In_Bangladesh, articles that fail to meet notability guidelines, such as Sheikh Mujibur Rahman statue destruction and List of people who died in the July massacre (as well as various articles about individuals who were killed), and articles that could be merged together, such as Anti-discrimination Students Movement, Student–People's uprising, and 2024 Bangladesh quota reform movement into the 2024 Bangladesh quota reform movement article.-- Xoocit (talk) 11:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: After the change of power in Bangladesh, a wave of misleading news about the country and its people was widely circulated. A significant portion of this content was propagated by Indian right-wing groups, pushing a false narrative that Hindus were being persecuted in Bangladesh. In reality, this narrative was entirely fabricated, with unrelated videos being falsely attributed to incidents in Bangladesh. During this entire episode, Bangladesh-based fact-checking organization Rumor Scanner Bangladesh played a crucial role in debunking false claims. Additionally, Alt News also exposed several misleading stories. Considering these efforts to uncover the truth, I believe there is sufficient justification to include this topic on Wikipedia. Baqi:) (talk) 12:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fil-Products Group

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

Non-notable corporation; fails WP:NCORP. Several source links are dead, but of those that are viewable and those I found in the WP:BEFORE search appear to be limited to WP:ORGTRIV and press releases; I didn't find WP:SIGCOV in WP:SIRS. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Business, and Philippines. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:26, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No Notability established yet. There are not enough references for a single search query.

Relisting per WP:REOPEN as a WP:BADNAC; see Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2025_January_8#Fil-Products_Group. Owen× ☎ 17:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Harvard Ichthus

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

Can't find WP:SIGCOV for this, article mostly relies on primary sources. Side note, the article's tone is also a little inappropriate for an encyclopedia; makes persuasive arguments. seefooddiet (talk) 02:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, News media, Schools, and Massachusetts. seefooddiet (talk) 02:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. No independent sources have been provided. Almost all the links are to this publication's own website. The only one that isn't is a broken link to the Harvard University website, which, I suspect, used to be a listing of this publication as being a student organization. But that would only establish existence, not notability. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Collegiate Network (where it is listed) as an AtD. No standalone notability here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of newspapers in Norfolk Island

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

Fails WP:NLIST. Bbb23 (talk) 16:18, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Lists, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:54, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. 2 items not enough to be called a list. Teraplane (talk) 06:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Only 2 non notable items. LibStar (talk) 02:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charlton Media Group

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

This company is not notable and it lacks enough credible sources to justify its own page. Eric Schucht (talk) 15:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Business, Companies, Asia, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Skynxnex (talk) 17:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm confused about what this company actually does is notable. From all appearances online, it just seems like a portfolio or holding company of disconnected trade publications that it buys from other publishers. Bearian (talk) 03:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kampala Sun

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

The article has 8 references, all of which provide only passing mentions. Does not satisfy WP:SIGCOV in multiple RS. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Uganda. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Beyond the 8 mention in the article with one being entirely about Kampala Suna, I found the news outlet mentioned in multiple other reliable sources like AllAfrica which mentions the EiC, ~~BBC,~~ and countless mentions in the New Vision which is one of the biggest news organisations in Uganda FuzzyMagma (talk) 05:41, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@FuzzyMagma: Could you please elaborate on what the BBC article says about Kampala Sun? TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 06:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, “sun” in Hausa means “central”. I confused Kampala Central with Sun. Comment deleted above FuzzyMagma (talk) 06:35, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing as I was digging I found that a Kampala Sun article was used as an evidence by the International Criminal Court during Dominic Ongwen trial FuzzyMagma (talk) 06:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More, the self-published book UgLish: Dictionary of Ugandan English by Ugandan analysts Bernard Sabiiti mentions “Kampala Sun , written by Jay Pinto is one of the most popular gossip columns in the tabloid press in Uganda” in page 34. Similar passage was written in Africa An Encyclopedia of Culture and Society, 3 Volumes

It was mentioned in Insights Into Uganda published by Fountain Publishers FuzzyMagma (talk) 07:00, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daily Dunya

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

This article is about the company that owns Daily Dunya, this is a directory reference, and this is a mention. Lacks direct and in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 23:43, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:20, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This subject does not seem notable. Fails WP:GNG. Mysecretgarden (talk) 20:22, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It's a member of the All Pakistan Newspapers Society (indicative, not determinative), and there's quite a lot of English-language analysis of its publications on GScholar[1]. From [2] found there, "The Urdu newspaper stories were extracted from the top five large circulation national dailies that is Daily Jang, Daily Dunya, Express, Daily Aaj, and Nawa-e-Waqt...". I presume that given the English language coverage evident that there would also be a level of coverage in Urdu. Its journalists have received awards[3][4] - reported on by unrelated sources. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 02:58, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde93 (talk) 01:55, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Added 2 new references and fixed other references to show specific info about Daily Dunya newspaper directly and clearly. This daily newspaper is simultaneously published from 7 major cities of Pakistan - Karachi, Lahore, Faisalabad, Gujranwala, Multan, Sargodha and Quetta. It's a notable Urdu-language daily newspaper in the country...Ngrewal1 (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Paul Ingles (via WP:PROD on 22 January 2024)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/News media

Contents

News media

Anti-Bangladeshi disinformation in India

Fil-Products Group

The Harvard Ichthus

List of newspapers in Norfolk Island

Charlton Media Group

Kampala Sun

Daily Dunya

Proposed deletions

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.