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. sufficient consensus. DGG ( talk ) 19:52, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Viewpoints (magazine)

[edit]

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

Non-notable magazine. No independent sources, no indication of notability. Does not meet WP:NMEDIA or WP:GNG. Guillaume2303 (talk) 07:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The University of Washington Alumni Association (UWAA), founded in 1889, is a non-profit organization whose purpose is to connect alumni with the University of Washington and its mission. Today, the UWAA has approximately 50,000 members worldwide, making it one of the nation's largest alumni associations. Viewpoints Magazine, a publication in partnership with the diversity community of the University of Washington and the University of Washington Alumni Association, is distributed bi-annually to approximately 30,000 individuals. Therefore, the magazine is of some importance. Onefortyone (talk) 19:45, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It may be of some importance, at least to U of Washington Alumni, but we need independent sources to be able to write about it in a reliable way. --Colapeninsula (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:36, 19 April 2012 (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) 01:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Generally every alumni organization has its own magazine, as do most other types of groups of people. Not important to the rest of us, no sources, and not much to say on the topic adds up to not notable and not a worthwhile topic for an encyclopedia. Borock (talk) 15:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:N, WP:NMEDIA, WP:GNG and is unreferenced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.243.157.172 (talk) 18:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable magazine with no third-party sourcing or coverage. --DAJF (talk) 04:33, 1 May 2012 (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.