| Revision as of 22:09, 15 March 2006 editDcandeto (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,703 edits →[]: keep← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:10, 15 March 2006 edit undoAlpha269 (talk | contribs)179 edits →[]: responseNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| *'''Speedy Keep'''. Very funny. ] | ] 22:03, 15 March 2006 (UTC) | *'''Speedy Keep'''. Very funny. ] | ] 22:03, 15 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' You're joking, right? ] 22:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' You're joking, right? ] 22:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
| **No, not joking. If being a front-page resource for the NYT makes one unnotable, this paper is not notable. -- ] 22:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:10, 15 March 2006
The New York Times
Anti-notable. This AFD is being placed because the NYT is anti-notable, namely, that anyone mentioned in its pages, despite its preeminence, popularity, and market penetration, is instantly cast into non-notability. The precedent for this is Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/John Bambenek (2nd nomination) and Misplaced Pages:Deletion review#John Bambenek where the subject was deleted because he was in the New York Times on the front page and that made him non-notable. It is time that the NYT come off the pages of wikipedia like the blackhole of notability it is. -- Alpha269 22:03, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep. Very funny. Batmanand | Talk 22:03, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Keep You're joking, right? dcandeto 22:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- No, not joking. If being a front-page resource for the NYT makes one unnotable, this paper is not notable. -- Alpha269 22:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)