Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Campusj

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 Keep. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-08 10:53Z

[edit] Campusj

Campusj (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A Columia University newspaper. Seems to have broken one major news story and has a couple of other sources. Not sure if that makes it notable though. Sasquatch t|c 16:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

1. It's not a Columbia University newspaper. It has the following schools represented by individual writers:

2. It's been the subject of the following non-trivial news articles:

• The Forward [1]
• Yeshiva University's College newspaper [2][3]
• The Jewish Press [4][5]
• Daniel Sieradski [6][7][8]

It's been featured in, or used a source in the following non-trivial news articles:

• Campus Watch [9]
• Andrew Sullivan[10]
• Juan Cole[11]
• The Volokh Conspiracy[12]
• Human Events
• The Jewish Press [13]
• The New York Times[14]
• Norman Finkelstein [15]

3.It is syndicated by the JTA, and thus appears in newspapers all over the world through that.[16]

--Urthogie 17:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions. -- Noroton 17:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep The first Jewish Press article and the Forward article constitute non-trivial, reliable, multiple sources, meaning the article passes WP:NOTABLE. I haven't read further (no time). I strongly suggest that information from these sources and others be used to improve the article with more information. Very convincing, Urthogie. Noroton 17:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep: It's much larger than originally stated, however, the article makes it seem very small or unorganized. The article needs much more work and expansion (outside of 'The Big Story'). Seicer (talk) (contribs) 19:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per above. While I do note that the source of the article is the editor-in-chief of the subject matter, I do not believe that his contributions to the article to this point have failed WP:RS, WP:N (or whatever they're all being redirected to these days). I submitted this article to the WP:COI noticeboard to be safe, but I think this article can stand on its own merit as it is now (with attention made to the source of the edits). For more info on the creator's contributions and a few of his thoughts on the matter, please see his talk page. ju66l3r 23:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep: article will improve. The editor of the site created the page only because I created it earlier and it was wrongly voted into deletion.--Urthogie 04:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per the information provided by Urthogie above. I also recommend copy-pasting that information to the article's talk page as it will undoubtedly prove useful to any effort to expand the article. -- Black Falcon 19:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Misguided nomination, please delist from AFD as soon as possible. Silensor 05:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Delist. — Athænara ✉ 08:27, 7 March 2007 (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.