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 keep. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 14:18, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Homeless Voice[edit]

The Homeless Voice (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)

Paid promotion for a non notable newspaper. Paper lacks significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Current sourcing does not extend beyond local interest coverage. A search found nothing good for notability for this newspaper. duffbeerforme (talk) 09:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm... it looks like it's a blanket name for an overall advocacy center run by the COSAC Foundation. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:47, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It might be worthwhile to retitle this to the COSAC Foundation. Their website uses the name "Homeless Voice" but a lot of the coverage for the group tends to refer to their current work by the foundation's name. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:08, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 08:41, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Probably not a G5 candidate, as the sockmaster wasn't blocked when the article was created, so they weren't evading a block. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:01, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
uh, missed that. It should be kept then. Anup [Talk] 14:00, 10 November 2016 (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.