Knowledge

:Articles for deletion/Libya Herald - Knowledge

Source 📝

697:(not policy, but a consensus worth respecting). For fun, I also did a Lexis search which turned up over 1000 hits, excluding BBC yielded 279 hits. Looking through these hits, they appear to be one of the best sources for international media on ISIS in Libya. Notability seems clearly apparent. (Note: Also have received profiles of them and their journalists in 688:
NewsBank has 2,600 hits for "Libya Herald". I checked and the Libya Herald itself is not indexed in NewsBank, but they are a frequent source for the BBC Monitored International Reports which makes up 1,500 of their hits. Thus, only about 1000 of those are actual cites as opposed to just reprinting of
391:: My delete will remain the same because those sources above just show reporting done by the newspaper and isn't about the newspaper. Per that page that was mentioned, it is presumed to be notable, but there really isn't a threshold for what is considered significant citations. 611:, Knowledge should also encourage free press outlets like the Libya Herald since many countries have excessive control of the press. Even in developed countries governments have gone to great lengths the distort the reporting of the news. In the United States 689:
their reports by the BBC. But still, just in April they've been cited as a news source by The Citizen in South Africa, Global Data News, African Manager, and the Committee to Protect Journalists. It seems they pass
175: 405:
Also, that isn't even a guideline - "This page is intended to be an explanatory supplement to the Knowledge:Notability guideline. It is not one of Knowledge's policies or guidelines.".
253: 128: 464:
Can you please cite the policy that supports your quote for "frequently cited by other reliable sources"? The ones you have cited so far do not mention that anywhere.
169: 227: 299:: The subject of this article has repeatedly and significantly been cited by other reliable sources which alone helps it meet encyclopedic criteria per 210:. References provided are of an employee promoting the subject matter rather than independent sources establishing the notability of the organization. 434:) as the subject came into being about half-a-decade ago and naturally, the first few searches would not support providing other sources talking 316: 335: 135: 562:
Sorry, I have no comment over your summation other than to say I'd have to respectfully disagree and this is what I'm referring to from
604: 438:
the subject per se on top of the results - given the fact that it's an online newspaper; ergo, I went with the point that referred to '
430:. In any case, I failed to provide with any links towards an 'about' of the subject (which is what I meant while indicating that the 310: 101: 96: 568:
objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability
105: 17: 190: 88: 157: 694: 630: 600: 300: 710: 702: 657: 733: 500: 40: 151: 698: 706: 675: 264: 238: 147: 729: 714: 677: 646: 624: 612: 579: 550: 524: 473: 459: 414: 400: 383: 379: 362: 291: 271: 245: 219: 70: 36: 375: 197: 638: 575: 557: 542: 520: 496: 480: 465: 455: 358: 211: 183: 642: 546: 469: 215: 668: 620: 343:(everything highlighted in BOLD) should be able to provide with further claim of significance. 259: 233: 92: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
728:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
426:
I concur; my apologies in case my message seemed to indicate that I was referring to it as a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
57: 608: 326: 163: 513:
with which the subject of this article sufficiently provides base not to have it deleted.
505:
2. To address your query, you may further refer to other policy related guidelines over
571: 534: 516: 506: 451: 443: 410: 396: 371: 354: 331: 287: 68: 637:
one of Knowledge's policies or guidelines." Why are you using it then as a rationale?
690: 563: 538: 510: 447: 346: 207: 53: 616: 84: 76: 122: 350: 322: 442:, providing sufficient base not to have the article deleted on the basis of 421: 406: 392: 283: 62: 345:
Undoubtedly, the article requires a lot of details but definitely passes
722:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
374:. Also numerous citations in Google Books and Google Scholar. 660:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
485:
Again, regret the confusion. Kindly allow me to classify -
605:
Google scholar listings Many citations in Google Scholar
313:
as a source of news and not for advertising or publicity
305:
not be considered in any specific order of significance
118: 114: 110: 182: 666:
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
43:). No further edits should be made to this page. 736:). No further edits should be made to this page. 615:was a big effort to manipulate the news media. 254:list of News media-related deletion discussions 533:. One last question, what specific text from 531:no policy supports your claim in bold letters 339:...and so on! A Google search made via terms 196: 8: 282:: I found no reliable significant coverage. 252:Note: This debate has been included in the 226:Note: This debate has been included in the 60:reflects the on-going community consensus. 489:frequently cited by other reliable sources' 440:frequently cited by other reliable sources' 251: 228:list of Libya-related deletion discussions 225: 353:/credible sources to support the same. 7: 693:clearly as well as the consensus at 495:or policy per se; however, it is an 24: 633:says at the very top that "it is 432:article requires a lot of details 703:Committee to Protect Journalists 341:"Libya Herald" -libyaherald.com 18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 609:Many citations in Google books 1: 695:Knowledge:Notability_(media) 631:Knowledge:Notability (media) 541:do you claim to apply here? 319:- again, as a source of news 497:how-to and information page 753: 715:02:09, 29 April 2017 (UTC) 678:02:18, 23 April 2017 (UTC) 647:20:41, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 625:20:28, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 601:media notability (point 4) 580:21:25, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 551:21:19, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 525:21:01, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 499:that I've cited to seek a 474:20:41, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 460:20:05, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 415:19:33, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 401:19:29, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 384:19:16, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 363:19:08, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 301:media notability (point 4) 292:18:15, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 272:17:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 246:17:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 220:16:48, 15 April 2017 (UTC) 71:21:54, 30 April 2017 (UTC) 56:has been demonstrated and 725:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 511:verifiability (WP:NRV) 448:verifiability (WP:NRV) 613:Operation Mockingbird 603:Other major factors: 629:The page you linked 507:notability (WP:ARTN) 503:among the community. 444:notability (WP:ARTN) 529:OK, so, to sum up, 349:and has sufficient 599:Main rationale is 501:level of consensus 707:AbstractIllusions 680: 274: 248: 744: 727: 671: 665: 663: 661: 561: 487:1. As assured, ' 484: 425: 269: 267: 262: 243: 241: 236: 201: 200: 186: 138: 126: 108: 65: 34: 752: 751: 747: 746: 745: 743: 742: 741: 740: 734:deletion review 723: 681: 669: 656: 654: 555: 478: 419: 311:Huffington Post 265: 260: 258: 239: 234: 232: 143: 134: 99: 83: 80: 63: 48:The result was 41:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 750: 748: 739: 738: 718: 717: 664: 653: 652: 651: 650: 649: 594: 593: 592: 591: 590: 589: 588: 587: 586: 585: 584: 583: 582: 514: 504: 486: 386: 365: 344: 338: 332:Times of Malta 329: 320: 314: 308: 294: 276: 275: 249: 204: 203: 140: 79: 74: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 749: 737: 735: 731: 726: 720: 719: 716: 712: 708: 705:). So: Keep. 704: 700: 696: 692: 687: 683: 682: 679: 676: 673: 672: 662: 659: 648: 644: 640: 636: 632: 628: 627: 626: 622: 618: 614: 610: 606: 602: 598: 595: 581: 577: 573: 569: 565: 559: 554: 553: 552: 548: 544: 540: 536: 532: 528: 527: 526: 522: 518: 512: 508: 502: 498: 494: 490: 482: 477: 476: 475: 471: 467: 463: 462: 461: 457: 453: 449: 445: 441: 437: 433: 429: 423: 418: 417: 416: 412: 408: 404: 403: 402: 398: 394: 390: 387: 385: 381: 377: 373: 369: 366: 364: 360: 356: 352: 348: 342: 337: 333: 328: 324: 318: 312: 306: 302: 298: 295: 293: 289: 285: 281: 278: 277: 273: 270: 268: 263: 255: 250: 247: 244: 242: 237: 229: 224: 223: 222: 221: 217: 213: 209: 199: 195: 192: 189: 185: 181: 177: 174: 171: 168: 165: 162: 159: 156: 153: 149: 146: 145:Find sources: 141: 137: 133: 130: 124: 120: 116: 112: 107: 103: 98: 94: 90: 86: 82: 81: 78: 75: 73: 72: 69: 67: 66: 59: 55: 51: 44: 42: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 724: 721: 685: 684:Very strong 670:Juliancolton 667: 655: 634: 596: 567: 530: 492: 488: 439: 435: 431: 427: 388: 367: 340: 304: 303:. Examples ( 296: 279: 261:CAPTAIN RAJU 257: 235:CAPTAIN RAJU 231: 205: 193: 187: 179: 172: 166: 160: 154: 144: 131: 85:Libya Herald 77:Libya Herald 61: 49: 47: 31: 28: 376:Bad-patches 323:Malta Today 317:Metro.co.uk 170:free images 699:Al Jazeera 570:. Thanks. 450:. Thanks. 351:verifiable 730:talk page 572:TopCipher 517:TopCipher 491:is not a 452:TopCipher 372:TopCipher 370:: as per 355:TopCipher 58:WP:NMEDIA 37:talk page 732:or in a 658:Relisted 639:JadeBlue 558:JadeBlue 543:JadeBlue 515:Thanks. 493:set rule 481:JadeBlue 466:JadeBlue 428:set rule 212:JadeBlue 129:View log 39:or in a 617:Knox490 535:WP:ARTN 389:Comment 176:WP refs 164:scholar 102:protect 97:history 691:WP:GNG 564:WP:NRV 539:WP:NRV 347:WP:GNG 280:Delete 208:WP:GNG 206:fails 148:Google 106:delete 54:WP:GNG 597:Keep. 436:about 191:JSTOR 152:books 136:Stats 123:views 115:watch 111:links 16:< 711:talk 701:and 686:Keep 643:talk 621:talk 607:and 576:talk 547:talk 537:and 521:talk 470:talk 456:talk 422:SL93 411:talk 407:SL93 397:talk 393:SL93 380:talk 368:Keep 359:talk 336:link 327:link 297:Keep 288:talk 284:SL93 216:talk 184:FENS 158:news 119:logs 93:talk 89:edit 64:Mkdw 50:keep 635:not 509:or 446:or 330:4. 321:3. 315:2. 309:1. 307:) - 266:(✉) 240:(✉) 198:TWL 127:– ( 713:) 674:| 645:) 623:) 578:) 566:- 549:) 523:) 472:) 458:) 413:) 399:) 382:) 361:) 334:- 325:- 290:) 256:. 230:. 218:) 178:) 121:| 117:| 113:| 109:| 104:| 100:| 95:| 91:| 52:. 709:( 641:( 619:( 574:( 560:: 556:@ 545:( 519:( 483:: 479:@ 468:( 454:( 424:: 420:@ 409:( 395:( 378:( 357:( 286:( 214:( 202:) 194:· 188:· 180:· 173:· 167:· 161:· 155:· 150:( 142:( 139:) 132:· 125:) 87:(

Index

Knowledge:Articles for deletion
talk page
deletion review
WP:GNG
WP:NMEDIA
Mkdw

21:54, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Libya Herald
Libya Herald
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Stats
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.