The result was merge to List of defunct newspapers of Norway. Liz Read! Talk! 00:14, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
This is the second nomination, as the first closed with no consensus. The original deletion rationale was: "Painfully obscure, this newspaper only existed for four months in 1898. None of the sources deal with the newspaper in a substantial way."
There were two keep votes, which were exactly that, votes. One stated that "The article provides basic facts about a well-attested historical publication", which does not touch upon policy at all. The other stated that "The article is informative ,it can be made a stub article instead of deleting it". Aside from it already being a stub, being informative is not a policy either.
One user asked for "translation of the key sources", but I'm opining that there are no key sources sufficient for Wikipedia guidelines. Sure, the facts are verifiable from catalogue sources such as this and this. But catalogue info is not enough since Wikipedia is not a directory. This history of labour movement newspapers from 1935 spends a whole four sentences on Arbeidernes blad, and this 1923 history of the city spends less: three sentences. Worst of all are the current sources in the article, which fall very short of demands and are passing mentions.
It could be merged to its successor, had it not been equally short-lived. There is no shortage of newspapers in Norway that lasted for a year or less. Not all of them, or rather very few of them, are notable. The first lasting workers' newspaper in Ålesund was in fact Nybrott (Ålesund newspaper), where Arbeidernes blad could warrant a mention in a section about forerunners.
To sum up the above, Arbeidernes blad fails WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:MILL, WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:GNG and there is a lack of WP:ATD. Geschichte ( talk) 09:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
01:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
16:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk)
01:03, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to List of defunct newspapers of Norway. Liz Read! Talk! 00:14, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
This is the second nomination, as the first closed with no consensus. The original deletion rationale was: "Painfully obscure, this newspaper only existed for four months in 1898. None of the sources deal with the newspaper in a substantial way."
There were two keep votes, which were exactly that, votes. One stated that "The article provides basic facts about a well-attested historical publication", which does not touch upon policy at all. The other stated that "The article is informative ,it can be made a stub article instead of deleting it". Aside from it already being a stub, being informative is not a policy either.
One user asked for "translation of the key sources", but I'm opining that there are no key sources sufficient for Wikipedia guidelines. Sure, the facts are verifiable from catalogue sources such as this and this. But catalogue info is not enough since Wikipedia is not a directory. This history of labour movement newspapers from 1935 spends a whole four sentences on Arbeidernes blad, and this 1923 history of the city spends less: three sentences. Worst of all are the current sources in the article, which fall very short of demands and are passing mentions.
It could be merged to its successor, had it not been equally short-lived. There is no shortage of newspapers in Norway that lasted for a year or less. Not all of them, or rather very few of them, are notable. The first lasting workers' newspaper in Ålesund was in fact Nybrott (Ålesund newspaper), where Arbeidernes blad could warrant a mention in a section about forerunners.
To sum up the above, Arbeidernes blad fails WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:MILL, WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:GNG and there is a lack of WP:ATD. Geschichte ( talk) 09:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
01:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
16:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk)
01:03, 15 February 2024 (UTC)