Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eden Daily News

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 of the debate was consensus to not delete, no consensus between keep and merge. Thryduulf 15:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eden Daily News

Non-notable local newspaper. Only 353 unique Google results [1] --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 00:59, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Also nominating The Reidsville Review, a similar article created by the same user who started Eden Daily News --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 01:09, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Another article to nominate: Mount Airy News, created by the same user. Royboycrashfan 01:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as non-notable, perhaps Speedy A1 for lack of context. Royboycrashfan 01:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment, don't think it can be speedy deleted for lack of context, as the policy states that "Limited content is not in itself a reason to delete if there is enough context to allow expansion". The article can be expanded, though I'm not sure if local newspapers are notable enough for Wikipedia --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 01:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Not that it can be expanded beyond a stub. Royboycrashfan 01:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable all AdamJacobMuller 02:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with Eden, North Carolina. Seano1 03:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge as per Seano1 Bridesmill 03:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with their respective communities unless expanded. I think local newspapers are so important to their local community that the subject would warrant separate articles but one-liner articles are not all that useful on their own. Sjakkalle (Check!) 05:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I have no concern for a one-liner like this. But, I am very concerned if anybody is voting to delete based on the noms reasoning about the "unique" google hits. This search had only 333 "unique" hits. That's less than the 353 cited by the nom as reason for deletion. --Rob 06:33, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge per Sjakkalle. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 14:31, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I know I'm bucking the deletionist trend here, but last I knew, most newspapers still are read in paper forms, not on Google portals. RGTraynor 17:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and expand, or at the very least merge per Sjakkalle. Not all newspapers, especially local ones, are going to have a strong Internet presence, so the Google test really shouldn't apply here. BryanG 22:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. The smallest local newspaper is still more important than the avalanche of Star Trek/Star Wars crap in Wikipedia. --Centauri 05:15, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep small towns and their press aren't so non-notable that they don't deserve encyclopedic mention --Krich (talk) 22:32, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Moe ε 02:03, 1 April 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.