Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inc. (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The result was article kept, early closure after nomination withdrawn, all other proposals were speedy keep -- The Anome 13:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inc. (magazine)

Inc. (magazine) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I almost deleted this as an advertisement. It seems to do little but promote the magazine/website. This http://www.inc.com?partner=wikipedia also disturbs me (look in the article). Wikipedia is not their partner last time I checked... I'm thinking that link was designed to figure out how many page views the company was getting from wikipedia, though I could be wrong. I did not delete due to the fact that the article has been around a while. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 02:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy keep, article may need cleanup but Inc. is the largest small business magazine in the US and is clearly notable. AFD is not cleanup. --Dhartung | Talk 03:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Note prior AFD at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Inc._Magazine. --Dhartung | Talk 03:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
    • I have reverted to a version before Vbelyavsky (talk · contribs) began replacing the article with promotional language (the editor also created two separate articles for the Inc 500 and Inc 5000, since speedied; see User talk). --Dhartung | Talk 04:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, then make this a speedy keep, I was wondering if I was missing something here. Thanks! —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 04:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

• speedy keep How did one of the very top business magazines get listed here? I don't know many business magazines, but even I know this one--and so will everyone--even the nom has realized.DGG 04:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy keep and close now that nomination's been retracted. --notJackhorkheimer ^{(talk / contribs)} 07:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy keep and close under snowball, with a stated monthly paid circulation of over 700,000 copies a month, how can this not be notable? Ben W Bell talk 08:45, 27 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.