Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I-mag teen 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 Delete spam like and no reliable secondary sources to establish notability. Davewild (talk) 13:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I-mag teen magazine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
I believe it's non-notable; I added a speedy deletion to the page, but it was contested by the author. I wanted to leave it up to general discussion. Mr. Absurd (talk) 20:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe that this page should be deleted, as it would be a noteworthy source of information to anyone interested in researching i-mag for publication in material, or just as a source of more information for the site.
Apologies for my previous comment of 'publicising i-mag'. I didn't mean it in that way - I just meant that if the article was on the internet, people could use it - not us making benefit out of it. I hope you consider reinstating the article.
Jackhowson (talk) 21:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- speedy delete - admitted to be a promotional article on Wikipedia. Absolutely no independent third-party sources given to establish the notability of the website. Wikipedia is not an advertising avenue for people's websites. This is spam. This is a perfect speedy delete. This is what is wrong with Wikipedia. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 14:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete. CSD G11 B.Wind (talk) 05:25, 22 March 2008 (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.