Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RFD Magazine

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 no consensus. The keep and delete sides seem to be ships passing in the night here. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 15:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RFD Magazine

A reader-written magazine. <200 unique Googles despite a repoted thirty-year history. Just zis Guy you know? 20:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

• Comment — Is interesting. I actually enjoyed reading that tidbit of knowledge. There is no advertising to be found in that article. Also, google is not the only search engine out there. I checked Yahoo and Ask.com, which have 516 hits, and 475 hits respectively. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 00:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. I can understand why this was AfD'd, but don't let the amateurish website mislead you. RFD (the magazine, not the website) is nationally distributed, and has indeed been published for three decades now, and is considered both a pioneering publication and an influential one in the rural faerie/queer community. It's written for an audience that includes large numbers of people living "off the grid", so it's no surprise that it doesn't generate a lot of web chatter. Besides, I pulled up 1,740 ghits! Article should be expanded, not deleted. --Pagana 06:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, or expand thoroughly! HawkerTyphoon 09:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. GHits aside, the article itself does not assert sufficient notability. If provided, such info also needs citations to "credible, third-party sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" per WP:V. --Satori Son 18:04, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. It's in the collection of many libraries including Harvard and University of California. I did a search at Worldcat, and found at least 80 libraries listed there with holdings (hard to get an exact total due to multiple places of publication). What was the methodology used to arrive at 200 unique Google hits? Like other people posting here, I get far more.--Larrybob 19:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment — Additionally, one can buy subscriptions to it on Amazon. This is a serious, well-estabished publication of clear notability. --Pagana 19:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

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.