Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LEDs Magazine
Appearance
- 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. JohnCD (talk) 17:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
- LEDs Magazine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Creating this nomination discussion on behalf of Magnolia677, who did not complete the process. I'm assuming it's for dubious notability. —МандичкаYO 😜 11:27, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:02, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:02, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:02, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:03, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - My searches (News, Books, browser, highbeam and thefreelibrary) found nothing to suggest this has received considerable coverage aside from this, this and this. SwisterTwister talk 22:22, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - This is a magazine directory listing. It doesn't even make a claim to notability, nor does it cite even one source. No prejudice against recreation as a real article if it can be shown to pass WP:GNG. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
- 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.