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. Mkativerata (talk) 22:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Protiti[edit]

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

A little magazine with many literal writings being promoted by its sub-editor. No evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:32, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:11, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:11, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete: This should have been speedied. A completely non-notable magazine, even in its local city. Fails all sorts of WP:N criteria. --Ragib (talk) 02:45, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:N. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 17:27, 24 October 2010 (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.