Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Feminist Mormon Housewives
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Nominator Withdrew - thinking back, definite conflict of interest, due to my extreme dislike of mormons and feminists.--Unionhawk Talk 00:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Feminist Mormon Housewives (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Non notable blog with practically no third party sources. Unionhawk Talk 20:22, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Between featured coverage in the New York Times, Bust magazine and the Salt Lake Tribune, I think this one has the multiple third party reliable sources with nontivial coverage demonstrating notability thing sewn up. DreamGuy (talk) 21:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep WP:WEB states web content is notable if "The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. This criterion includes reliable published works in all forms, such as newspaper and magazine articles, books, television documentaries, [and] websites" This seems fulfilled by the mentions in the Salk Lake Tribune and the New York Times, though the article is a bit reliant on self-published sources (the blog itself), which is troubling. Nosleep break my slumber 23:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep but Cleanup The news coverage turned up in a google news archive search: [1] turns up a fair amount of coverage. This is more than enough to establish notability for me. I agree with Nosleep: the current state of the article is pretty bad--it relies heavily on the blog itself (and other blogs) as sources, which is unacceptable. Cazort (talk) 23:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per nosleep's reasoning. The NYT coverage means much more than the SL Tribune, since it is actually outside the Utah/Mormon universe. tedder (talk) 23:57, 7 May 2009 (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.