Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liblogs

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 to delete. W.marsh 14:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Liblogs

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

Article fails WP:WEB. WP:WEB calls for multiple non-trivial published works about the website from verifiable and reliable sources, a Google search yields one, maybe two. No evidence that this website has won notable awards or that the content is distributed via a medium which is both well known and independent of the creators. Should be deleted. RWR8189 19:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletions. --Slgrandson (page - messages - contribs) 20:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Agree that the mentions are trivial only gets a mention in article about the topic in general, but no notibility of its own was shown.--Dacium 21:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete No notability at the present.. Perhaps there is a case to be made for keeping Progressive Bloggers alive, and also Blogging Tories, but not really this one. Watchsmart 00:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. The Liblogs played an important part in the recent Liberal Party leadership race. It's founder, Jason Cherniak, was Blog Co-chair for the winning Stephane Dion campaign. Many Liblogs members were given media accreditation at the convention. Liblogs has been featured in prominent "verifiable, reliable" media sources:
  • "Contenders for Liberal leadership go to the blogs" - The Globe and Mail; July 10, 2006
  • "Liberal contest starts turning into blog party" - Toronto Star; July 8, 2006
  • "Lost in MySpace" - Ottawa Citizen; Sept 23, 2006
  • "No Swift boat, no Rathergate for Canadian web logs" - Toronto Star; Jan 21, 2006

Also, statements like "No evidence that this website has won notable awards" betray a fundamental ignorance about the article. Liblogs is not about www.liblogs.ca, it's about all 250 sites that comprise the group. Therefore, any attempt to determine its notability must take into account the combined notability of its members.
--The Invisible Hand 12:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. There is no realistic reason to treat The Blogging Tories, Progressive Bloggers or Liblogs differently. They are all lists of hundreds of bloggers in Canada and they are all read daily by Canadian opinion makers, including politicians, journalists and lobbyists. All three are integral to current Canadian politics and, unless Canadian politics is considered "trivial", all three should remain. Jason Cherniak 13:22, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Keep. The site liblogs.ca is mentioned in reliable sources, but in each case it's not the primary topic. Google finds 643 inbound links to www.liblogs.ca which is not tremendous. The argument for keeping this article would be based on the political significance of the site. I believe that it has about the same significance as Blogging Tories, so both should go together, but the references for this one are slightly better. If we deleted this article as well as Blogging Tories we would then have practically no coverage of political blogging in Canada. In fact, I might be persuaded to give up this article if someone would write Political blogging in Canada. The closest thing we have is Canadian blogosphere but that one is very short. EdJohnston 16:46, 20 February 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.