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 no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:53, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Akhbar e Khawateen

[edit]

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

This article on an Urdu-language magazine was a disputed Prod. No indication of notability or references provided in the article. Google books and scholar searches reveal that the subject exists, but the name mostly appears in passing mentions or lists of publications. I found no "Significant coverage" focused on the subject. Dialectric (talk) 03:30, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 00:44, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:44, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:38, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, v/r - T P 21:20, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - I ran a Google Book search and the magazine is mentioned in several surveys of Pakastani media. This hints at possibly being a notable magazine. Interpreting the results of the search is problematic as most of the results are unavailable for preview to evaluate further. "Perspective Volume 5" shows a snippet summary of Some of them with wide circulations are "Akhbar-e-Khawateen" in Urdu, "Begum" in Bengali and "Women's World", "Mirror" and "She" in English. These and other women's magazines do not confine themselves to household hints, fashions and ... This would indicate that the magazine isn't some small minor publications. Given that there is no solid evidence that the magazine is notable, and the wikipedia article is a sub-stub, I see no compelling reason to keep this article. -- Whpq (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Google Books does indeed show that the magazine exists. Based on this, it warrants some notability; Mar4d (talk) 10:26, 30 June 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.