Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FrontPageMag.com

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 keep - CrazyRussian talk/email 17:57, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FrontPageMag.com

Propaganvertizing --Xrblsnggt 15:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Redirect to David Horowitz. FrontPageMag could be a better article if one removed the gratuitious list of contributors and added some balance, rather that its current content free state. --Ben Houston 15:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak keep~~ Keep. I've removed the non-notables from the list of contributors, per above. Even so, may of the remnants are just syndicated columnists who hardly count as contributors. Nonetheless, the website appears barely notable. -Will Beback 09:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article makes a claim to notability, but where is the evidence for it? There's a CNN article - which is about one of the principal financial backers. Rational Review is, if anything, more questionable in terms of notability. The People for the American Way got upset about its umbrella organization, not about FrontPageMag.com. It looks like a collection of ads and a place to republish popular columns from elsewhere, which makes me question its status as a genuine, notable publication. I'm willing to change my opinion, of course, given reason to do so. Alexa rank is 13,600, but notability is nothing without verifiability. Captainktainer * Talk 13:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep. I'm barely convinced, but I am convinced. The links posted in this AfD prove borderline notability. Good job, all.Captainktainer * Talk 10:49, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Looking around to see if there are some sources I found these two, which we can't use:
  FrontPageMag.com is notorious for its racism...[1] from Bill White (neo-Nazi)!
  
  In an interview with leading neo-con propaganda outlet Frontpagemag.com..[2] from a Lyndon LaRouche source.
- I'll add legitimate sources that I find to the article, but these do indicate some notability. -Will Beback 18:31, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Here's another:
  In fact, the bourgeois revolution has been joined by such prominent neocon institutions as National Review, the Weekly Standard, and, indeed, Frontpagemag.com...[3] Lew Rockwell
- It's too minor a mention to include, but it further establishes the notability of the subject. -Will Beback 19:14, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- a well-known (albeit controversial) online conservative journal, which has over a one million Google entries, even when excluding every iteration of its domain name (FrontPageMag, FrontPageMagazine, FrontPageOnline). The online journal, and its editor David Horowitz, is widely quoted within certain circles (even in Investors Business Daily[4]), and widely ridiculed in others, which makes it far-and-away notable. The article needs to be cleaned up, expanded with criticism and sourcing, but stub-status is no reason for a deletion.--Leflyman^Talk 10:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Leflyman, and because I know at least one person (myself) who came looking for an article on this very topic, and I can't possibly be the only one. --KGF0 ( T | C ) 08:31, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I also note that there are over 50 discrete articles on wikipedia linking to the page in question, with further supports usefullness, if not notability per se. --KGF0 ( T | C ) 08:39, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.