Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Varsitarian

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, for an article which is a member of a category of articles (student newspapers at accredited universities) about which we have no consensus, as Travellingcari points out. There are some sources so whether or not this passes WP:N remains debatable. The fact is we do not have a notability guideline for periodicals and newspapers (student or otherwise), and until we do many AfD's on publications like The Varsitarian will end up at no consensus given the large gray area in our general notability guideline.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 09:44, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Varsitarian

The Varsitarian (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable student/school newspaper, no indepedent RS for notability...just another student paper. Cquan ^{(after the beep...)} 08:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

• Comment while there doesn't appear to be much in the way of secondary coverage, there is some precedent for keeping these, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Mirror (UNC Newspaper) for one. I was the original nom on that one and while I don't necessarily agree that student newspapers are notable, it's a potential systemic bias issue since there have been other AfDs that indicate indexing of Philippine newspapers is not the most comprehensive. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 13:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. The Varsitarian is the main newspaper of University of Santo Tomas, one of the major universities of the Philippines, and not just another student paper. It has been quoted in several independent articles:
  • A news about UST's support for Rodolfo Noel Lozada, a key witness of Philippine National Broadband Network controversy.
  • An article from Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines about the continuation of expansion plans for University of Santo Tomas Hospital.
  • An opinion column on a rebuttal about the removal of sex education in Philippine schools as recommended by Dr. Angelita Aguirre, head of the country's Human Life International.
  • An old news article about the corruption of the school's ROTC program, which led to the death of a student-whistle blower.
  • A news article about a posthumous award for four nuns who saved lives in a 1983 sinking of M/V Doña Cassandra but died in the process.

The nomination is a perfect example of systemic bias and sheer irresponsibility. Starczamora (talk) 04:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

• Delete: I really don't see it. Almost no school newspapers are notable. My alma mater has a school newspaper with its own website and a near-200 year history (earliest college newspaper in the area, probably), but no article -- and I would !vote to delete that, too, if someone created an article for it. CRGreathouse (t | c) 15:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment. How should we define notability on a school paper then? If it's from Harvard, it's okay, but a MAJOR university in another country it is not? Bias I say... Starczamora (talk) 15:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

There may well be bias. We need more American and European college newspaper articles in AfD. Want to start nominating? CRGreathouse (t | c) 18:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment that there's no conensus whatsoever on any of this is the only consensus I found when we I did a random sample of those that came up for AfD. I don't think you'll ever get consensus to delete all. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 18:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say I wanted to delete all, just that I suspect there are many school paper articles which (like this one) don't meet WP:N and WP:V and so should be deleted. CRGreathouse (t | c) 04:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Apologies. My point was that a number have been kept in exactly this situation. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 13:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

• Delete, the problem with this article is that there are no reliable sources actually about the newspaper. All of the sources mentioned by Starczamora are news reports that list what other people said in the newspaper. The references in the article are all from the its own website, as well as a broken link. What is required for Notability would be sources that discuss the newspaper itself and are independent. --Captain-tucker (talk) 18:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Take note of what TravellingCan said. Unlike the US and most European countries, Philippine news sources aren't as accessible over the Internet. If you're only relying on Google to back up the sources that were cited on this article, then you should start writing to the webmasters of the three major newspapers of the Philippines (the Inquirer, the Bulletin and the Star) and tell them that they should make their archives more Google-friendly. The next best thing that I can think of is dropping by the Philippine National Archives and get all the best microfilms and photocopies of news articles and probably upload them into Commons, since the websites of these newspapers are almost good for nothing. That good enough for you? --- Tito Pao (talk) 03:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Publication of a major Philippine university itself involved in some significant events, among which includes the abolition of the compulsory ROTC program in the Philippines. --- Tito Pao (talk) 03:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment. Here is the article to back it up... (note that it is mirrored from the defunct INQ7.net website)

MANILA police are looking for a University of Sto. Tomas student who might have information that could link the killing of his classmate to the exposé that the two of them made about alleged corruption and bribery in the school’s Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC)...

Police are also looking for other UST students, ROTC cadet and cadet officers and ROTC staff interviewed by the campus paper The Varsitarian, as well as the reporter who broke the story.

In The Varsitarian’s Feb. 21 issue, the students aired various grievances against the ROTC, including the sale of nonexistent uniform accessories and lecture manuals, illegal suspension and a gun-toting incident.

Also note that this expose was first published by The Varsitarian before other publications did. Happy now? Starczamora (talk) 10:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. A lot of media coverage. Definitely notable. Malinaccier (talk) 15:13, 7 June 2008 (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.