Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comic Legends Legal Defense Fund
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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The result was Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) RadioFan (talk) 12:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comic Legends Legal Defense Fund (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
organization lacks significant coverage in reliable 3rd party sources. RadioFan (talk) 02:22, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Most of the organization's activities were in the "Dark Ages" before online coverage became commonplace, in print publications which are no longer active (and therefore not archived online, either). Third-party sources that document its notability do exist in print, but require some offline information archaeology from comics-industry journals of the period to cite. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 02:49, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment 1987 is hardly the "dark ages". Many major newspapers have archives going back that far and much further in some cases. Even if online sources aren't available, print sources are fine as references as long as they are verifiable.--RadioFan (talk) 03:13, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The Calgary Herald and The Calgary Sun do not have online archives, and you'll find events in provincial Canada during the 1980s poorly represented in the freely searchable news archives which do exist. Media coverage is verifiable, but requires spending time at the library. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 12:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment 1987 is hardly the "dark ages". Many major newspapers have archives going back that far and much further in some cases. Even if online sources aren't available, print sources are fine as references as long as they are verifiable.--RadioFan (talk) 03:13, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 13:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 13:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A time-intensive trip to the library will be necessary to provide reliable 3rd party sources for this article, but they exist. Spidey104 18:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment being sure that sources exist isn't the same as having verifiable sources. It sounds like the best outcome here might be userfying the article to give sufficient time to locate references. A solid claim to notability is necessary as well, which I'm not seeing there currently --RadioFan (talk) 18:58, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Several verifiable sources have been added so far. - Jason A. Quest (talk) 11:56, 27 July 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.