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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamite News[edit]

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

Non-notable news website. No significant coverage in third party reliable sources and current sources are either unreliable, primary or self published. The article has been created by a SPA user and appear to have close connection with the subject which they should disclose. GSS (talk|c|em) 18:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 18:06, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 18:06, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 18:06, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller! (distænt write) 23:01, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The news site seema to be quite well established and gaining traction but the coverage of it seems to be lacking. Perhaps too soon to meet guidelines. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:15, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The creator of this article Khanna125 has been blocked by CheckUser for sockpuppetry. GSS (talk|c|em) 03:19, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am a regular reader of Dynamite News. I landed on this page via Google search result. While going through this discussion, I feel that this user User:GSS-1987 needs to know some important information about the country he hails from, which is India if I am not wrong. While going through the page I saw that the article talks about two reports. One of them being from some blogger, Sanjeev Singh, who supposedly is a reporter at The Times of India, has mentioned about a tweet from Dynamite News in the very first paragraph of his blog which is removed as an unrelated source by Mr. User:GSS-1987. Also the second reference which this guy thinks as unreliable is from a news website of the Qaumi_Awaz which is a sister concern of National_Herald_(India) as per Wikipedia. This user seems to be someone looking to be paid to create this page. I will thus urge Wikipedians to take strict action against this person and restore the Wikipedia ethics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.30.184.244 (talk)

@47.30.184.244: First I removed that link earlier because I was unable to find the name of the subject and blogs are generally not acceptable as reliable source because the blog may not be subject to the news organization's normal fact-checking process. Secondly I never questioned the reliability of Qaumi Awaz and at last this is your first ever edit and the way you are talking and pointing out things I can say you are the same person who created this page and was blocked by checkuser so you must disclose your COI. Thank you – GSS (talk|c|em) 04:23, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@GSS-1987:I have not created an account on wikipedia, as I can not regularly contribute to wikipedia and thus using IP for communication. The only COI is that I am a regular reader of this organisation's news articles, if at all this is a COI. I am just a common man with ethics. I am just worried about the way you have removed and reverted back the links when you were exposed by me. Please make sure that you read the content of any source before making any decision. Instead of being concerned on my way of talking, please evaluate your way of talking as well. You still seem to be a Wikipedian looking for money. Also, when you do reasoning, please paste the complete statement about any guideline. I went through WP:NEWSBLOG and it clearly mentions about blogs that "These may be acceptable sources if the writers are professionals". Your actions seem to be questionable. Also when you mentioned initially that "current sources are either unreliable, primary or self published", this in itself generically questioned the reliability of Qaumi_Awaz.

Delete Fails WP:NCORP and WP:NMEDIA. FITINDIA 17:35, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete--Fails NMEDIA and NCORP. Nothing resemblant to significant mentions across RS.~ Winged Blades^Godric 04:16, 8 February 2018 (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.