Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arts and Opinion

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arts and Opinion

Arts and Opinion (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Online ezine. No independent reliable sources have been found to indicate the ezines importance or impact on the world despite effort. Prod contested by creator of article (and ezine) with "you're making the decision based on fixed criteria over and above the quality of the publication, vouchsafed by the distinguished list of contributors. There are exceptions to very rule and Arts & Opinion is one of them"[1]. However articles from "distinguished contributors" are all reprints of articles published elsewhere. Recommending deletion. Siobhan Hansa 12:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fuhghettaboutit 23:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete If it's notable it should be verifiable as such. Author of article, from quote above, seems to agree that it is not but wants to be excused anyway. If it's as good as they say, and really does have the famous contributors listed there, then getting some other verifiable source that discusses it should be easy as pie. The fact that it's not, apparently, is even more troubling for a periodical making grandiose claims like that. If it ever gets such sources the article can be recreated. Until then it doesn't belong here. DreamGuy 08:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete if the contributors had written their pieces for this ezine particularly, then it would be notable. However, based on the article, it seems that they only reprint information. Not notable, in that case. Lankiveil 10:34, 13 May 2007 (UTC).
• Delete per WP:WEB. The creator claims it's so special it should be an exception to our rules, but fails to back this up with any convincing reasons why this might be the case. Alexa rank is 2 million+, which is very very poor. In addition, the article was created and almost exclusively edited by an account called "Artsandopinion", which strongly suggests this is a WP:COI/Spam case as well. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:06, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Infrangible 01:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Spamvertisement. - Crockspot 05:56, 15 May 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.