Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
ChrisO~enwiki (talk | contribs) →Bishop Hill (blog): - delete |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
* '''Keep''' as an article about the blog and no merging. No merging to the article about the man, and merging it into the book article is not an opinion as far as I can see. What is the similarities between a book about the Hockey stick controversy and a long running blog? The [[Andrew Montford]] work as a main article and the book and the blog is both explained in more details in each of the articles [[Bishop Hill (blog)]] and [[The Hockey Stick Illusion]] [[User:Nsaa|Nsaa]] ([[User talk:Nsaa|talk]]) 17:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC) |
* '''Keep''' as an article about the blog and no merging. No merging to the article about the man, and merging it into the book article is not an opinion as far as I can see. What is the similarities between a book about the Hockey stick controversy and a long running blog? The [[Andrew Montford]] work as a main article and the book and the blog is both explained in more details in each of the articles [[Bishop Hill (blog)]] and [[The Hockey Stick Illusion]] [[User:Nsaa|Nsaa]] ([[User talk:Nsaa|talk]]) 17:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC) |
||
* As I [[Talk:Bishop_Hill_(blog)#Notability.3F|outlined here]], the blog fails [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:WEB]], and where there is coverage (for example, Delingpole's blog posts) the person (Montford) and the blog (Bishop Hill) are conflated. The blog has no notability that is independent of Montford. [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] ([[User talk:Guettarda|talk]]) 17:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC) |
* As I [[Talk:Bishop_Hill_(blog)#Notability.3F|outlined here]], the blog fails [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:WEB]], and where there is coverage (for example, Delingpole's blog posts) the person (Montford) and the blog (Bishop Hill) are conflated. The blog has no notability that is independent of Montford. [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] ([[User talk:Guettarda|talk]]) 17:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC) |
||
* '''Delete'''. I took the time to review this on the [[Factiva]] news database. It found only one mention this blog, in the context of an article that cited Andrew Montford's role. As Guettarda says, the person and the blog are inextricably linked in terms of notability, and neither has any notability independent of the other. I should add that I'm also uncertain of whether Montford himself is particularly notable, as Factiva found only three mentions of him - one of them in an op-ed column that Montford himself wrote. -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] ([[User talk:ChrisO|talk]]) 19:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:38, 22 April 2010
Bishop Hill (blog)
- Bishop Hill (blog) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It appears this article might not be notable enough. However a merge is being discussed, one with a book article The Hockey Stick Illusion I believe however merging an article about a book and a blog would detract from the book. The other option is merging to Andrew Montford A lot of the stuff from this article is already within the montford article, i propose this article be deleted if consensus says it is not notable enough. And the other two articles are not be merged as both are highly notable and should have their own articles mark nutley (talk) 17:01, 22 April 2010 (UTC) mark nutley (talk) 17:01, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- Keep as an article about the blog and no merging. No merging to the article about the man, and merging it into the book article is not an opinion as far as I can see. What is the similarities between a book about the Hockey stick controversy and a long running blog? The Andrew Montford work as a main article and the book and the blog is both explained in more details in each of the articles Bishop Hill (blog) and The Hockey Stick Illusion Nsaa (talk) 17:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- As I outlined here, the blog fails WP:GNG and WP:WEB, and where there is coverage (for example, Delingpole's blog posts) the person (Montford) and the blog (Bishop Hill) are conflated. The blog has no notability that is independent of Montford. Guettarda (talk) 17:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. I took the time to review this on the Factiva news database. It found only one mention this blog, in the context of an article that cited Andrew Montford's role. As Guettarda says, the person and the blog are inextricably linked in terms of notability, and neither has any notability independent of the other. I should add that I'm also uncertain of whether Montford himself is particularly notable, as Factiva found only three mentions of him - one of them in an op-ed column that Montford himself wrote. -- ChrisO (talk) 19:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)