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. czar 22:19, 20 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Banga (newspaper)

Banga (newspaper) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced stub, ten years old. The only edits after creation seem to be vandalism by IPs. ${\displaystyle \color {blue}\chi }$_chi ( talk) 17:06, 13 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. ${\displaystyle \color {blue}\chi }$_chi ( talk) 17:06, 13 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 17:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 17:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete it is long past time we stopped tolerating any unsourced articles. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 14:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Johnpacklambert Your argument for deletion is in conflict with WP:ARTN "'Article content does not determine notability'", when you use this argument, it devalues your position and your vote. Jeepday ( talk) 15:09, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply
    • Verrifiability means that all things should be sourced. That trumps this vague claim that we should not judge articles by what they say. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 15:11, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply
      • @ Johnpacklambert: While all things should be sourced, per WP:BEFORE C.1 "'If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for AfD.'" The question at Afd is: is the subject of the article notable? While WP:V "'All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material'" is about the content of the article. Removal of unreferenced material must be balanced against WP:PAGEBLANKING. Jeepday ( talk) 17:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete There is nothing indicating notability in the article, there are no foreign language versions of the article, My search for references was inconclusive, but I was not able to find anything to clearly shows the subject is notable. Jeepday ( talk) 15:09, 17 December 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete: Abandoned, no foreign versions, one sentence, no citations. There don't seem to be any reliable sources supporting this newspaper's existence. Scrooge200 ( talk) 22:01, 18 December 2020 (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.