Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Litblog

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

Full of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. No evidence for notability separate from the blog article. DirtyHarry991 (talk) 08:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Internet. DirtyHarry991 (talk) 08:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not even an unsourced claim to notability. Ten years with a "does not cite any sources" tag is enough. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 19:52, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This could be a decent article if someone would make the effort to add some inline citations. The two articles from the Guardian and the Village Voice piece (all in the "external links" section) should be enough to establish notability. I agree that the article is full of OR and needs to be cut down quite a bit, but with some effort there could be a reasonable article here. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect Does not cite any sources. The two articles mentioned talk about it only a bit and at best this is right for a redirect, if someone can name a logical direction. Archrogue (talk) 18:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I thought about draftifying, but articles should be based on sources, not looking for sources to a text already written by someone else - no one will do that either. Suitskvarts (talk) 10:57, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]