Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First Light 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. Consensus herein is for deletion. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:04, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First Light Magazine

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

Article created and de-PRODded by COI editor. Magazine was established 12 (twelve!!) days ago. PROD reason still stands: No evidence of coverage in independent reliable sources, seems to be WP:TOOSOON for an article on this magazine. Hence: delete. Randykitty (talk) 19:28, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Only 41 Ghits for "First Light Magazine" -wikipedia, which tells a story. No significant coverage in reliable sources, but then how would there be? It's far too soon. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 19:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Talk about WP:TOOSOON!. LaMona (talk) 22:32, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Brand new magazine with no significant independent coverage.131.118.229.17 (talk) 20:25, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Definitely too soon for an article. No coverage in independent reliable sources. DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) WER 18:24, 26 November 2014 (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.