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. MBisanz ^talk 04:37, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tattoo (newspaper)[edit]

Tattoo (newspaper) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Nominating on behalf of an IP user, reason given was “Issues with this include notability, self-promotional, defunct entity, content not suitable for an encyclopedia, ” Beeblebrox (talk) 02:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:58, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:58, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep defunct is not a valid reason for deletion. In its lifetime it won a large number of awards including 34 from the National Newspaper Association,55 Scholastic Press Forum awards since 1999; and the Suburban Newspapers Association's award for Best Young People's Coverage in both 2002 and 2005, as well as its feature writing award in 2007. Atlantic306 (talk) 12:52, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or merge with the Youth_Journalism_International entry. The Tattoo stub content really should really be part of the Youth_Journalism_International entry since YJI seems to be the successor organization and it's entry if judged by itself would likely qualify for deletion. Together I believe that they are worthy and should be included, separately not so much.

• Added March 14. I will try to carve out some time to add the Tattoo information to the Youth Journalism entry over the weekend. I'd hate to see these deleted, but either of these standing alone are incomplete and delete worthy. The Columbian Journalism Librarian (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn’t really make sense. Deleting and merging are kind of mutually exclusive options. (Also please make new remarks at the bottom, I’ve moved this one for you.) Beeblebrox (talk) 20:21, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I am currently discussing the founder's article. I don't believe it should be merged with Youth Journalism International because that also doesn't meet notability retirements i.e. the only people who care about Youth Journalism International is Youth Journalism International according to its citation list. As for this article, its not properly sourced and ticks off a lot of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. CamdenEric (talk) 22:48, 19 March 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.