Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rungh 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. Daniel (talk) 23:58, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rungh Magazine

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Article about a magazine, not reliably sourced as passing our notability criteria for magazines. As usual, magazines are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist -- the notability test is the reception of independent media coverage in sources other than themselves to properly establish that the magazine is externally recognized as significant by anybody outside its own marketing department -- but the references here are primary sources, such as its own self-published web presence and the self-published websites of directly affiliated organizations, not real third party media coverage about it. Bearcat (talk) 21:51, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:51, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:51, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HistoricalAccountings (talk) 22:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete possibly PROMO as creators only recent edits are creating this article and adding direct links to Rungh Magazine website in other articles. Unable to find any secondary sources. Slywriter (talk) 22:53, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, there's actually decent amount of secondary peer reviewed sources for Rungh Magazine about it's notability as a Canadian south asian magazine, im just a new editor and thought it would be most direct to cite the magazine itself. I will work on this more. Maliv.kh (talk) 23:41, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you look closely- 5 out of the 9 resources cited are secondary sources from peer reviewed academic articles and news articles. Pardon my asking as I'm new, but why is that not adequate? Maliv.kh (talk) 18:53, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. LucyLucy (talk) 05:06, 15 February 2021 (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.