Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Postmedia and its Digital Reinvention

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. –MuZemike 23:23, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Postmedia and its Digital Reinvention

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

Huge essay. Good content should be merged to Postmedia, the parent article, which is barely a stub. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep per WP:SK "The nominator ... fails to advance an argument for deletion—perhaps only proposing a non-deletion action such as ... merging". Warden (talk) 15:49, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The argument for deletion was WP:ESSAY. The merge was just saying that there may be some content worth saving. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:54, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - correction - : Quite correct, the correct link is WP:NOTESSAY, and WP:OR. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - This is still a speedy keep. Merger may well be sensible but it is not achieved by deletion so you have come to the wrong place. Please see WP:MAD which explain the legal licensing constraint. Another editor had already started a merge proposal so this nomination is redundant - please withdraw it. Warden (talk) 16:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note - this article is part of an educational project. The author is a new Wikipedian and a university student. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Part of the project should be teaching the students what appropriate articles for wikipedia are. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Agreed. Our hope is that the student will return to the page and properly wikify the article. Any help (guidance, for example) from the community is always appreciated. Jaobar (talk) 16:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per OR and NOTESSAY, just as above. Again, in spite of it's many fine qualities as an essay, it isn't appropriate content for Wikipedia. Dennis Brown (talk) 16:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per OR and NOTESSAY; if there's any content in here that's suitable for an encyclopedia, then merge it into Postmedia Network. Bearcat (talk) 19:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Wouldn't it be a good idea if students on this kind of project were advised to start by finding a redlink.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 01:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Yes, it's obvious original research and painfully slanted. This actually made sense in parts, which puts it a cut above the prose that's usually found in these things. It actually contains a kernel of information, even if it currently reads like Make Money Fast In Our Digital Future. (Sorry. Been reading Adorno.) Postmedia News and Postmedia Network are notable businesses with significant impacts on history and culture, though apparently not technology yet. The name of the business combined with the title makes this give a very bad first impression. ("Postmedia?" MEGO!) I certainly wouldn't mind seeing this userfied. Its sources and a bit of its text could eventually be used to improve real articles. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 05:01, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy The article's creator is a member of this class, which is supported by both WikiPriject Wikipedia and Wikpiedia Ambassadors. I don't believe this article belongs at AfD. PaintedCarpet (talk) 10:50, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This has been brought to the attention of ANI since it's the third article from this class to come to AfD. PaintedCarpet (talk) 11:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. there may be some usable content, but from the title onward there are problems with Essay form. Point of View and Original research.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 11:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy - per User:PaintedCarpet. ukexpat (talk) 17:32, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Close AFD and let the merge discussion continue elsewhere. There was a merge tag placed on the article at the time this was nominated to AFD. [1] An article should never be nominated for deletion its first day out. Discuss what's wrong with it on the talk page, before trying to delete it. Dream Focus 21:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Userfy per WP:NOTESSAY and WP:OR. Being part of educational project is not a free pass to put up unencyclopedic articles. The teachers running this project deserve to be trouted for not understanding the medium before they waded in with others following them. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:29, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, delete. And while I acknowledge this is part of an educational project, it should probably not be userfied, since it has no encyclopedic potential per its very nature (like a lot of the articles that are part of this educational project). CharlieEchoTango (contact) 04:29, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and do not userfy. We are not a webhost for academic projects. causa sui (talk) 20:37, 20 December 2011 (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.