[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OutThere (magazine)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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) EggRoll97 (talk) 02:49, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OutThere (magazine)

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

OutThere (magazine) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

possibly too soon but this publication isn't notable yet, there's no coverage of the magazine itself, just press releases and minor mentions in otherwise unremarkable publications. CUPIDICAE💕:: 20:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you're saying, but the challenge of course, is it being a publication that is part of a minority LGBT+ community. I would argue that this makes it no less notable (particularly in recognising and championing minority communities on Wikipedia), but perhaps less discussed in mainstream sources. The Professional Publishers Association and Campaign magazine in the UK, I would consider remarkable and verifiable citations. It is also unlikely that any publication, from very notable to less notable will have an article of the publication itself, by a different publication – but more likely to have verifiable articles about the people that run it – evident even in the infinite sources for magazines as notable as Vogue_(magazine). I didn't include those in this article, as those verified citations are congratulatory and potentially mistaken for promotional. By application of the reason cited above, probably nearly everything anything under List_of_LGBT_periodicals or List_of_magazines_in_the_United_Kingdom should be marked for deletion, which would be sad for Wikipedia, as it would be the removal of both minority and publishing history. The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 21:45, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sad as it may be, the way for us to argue for the keep of an article is to provide evidence of the subject's coverage in reliable sources, not explain why we don't think said coverage exists. I've seen enough people (not you) spout nonsense about their PAID promotional article "countering systemic bias" and being "about a minority/marginalized subject" to know we should not promote such trends as as acceptable at AfD. -Indy beetle (talk) 02:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indy beetleAgreed and understood. Just my long-winded way (I'm learning to be shorter, promise!) to say what has already been said under WP:NMEDIA which in itself addresses publications in ethnic and other non-trivial niche markets The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 12:08, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 21:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 21:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 21:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
RainbowWikiWarrior which major awards would those be? CUPIDICAE💕 23:20, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Praxidicae awards listed under "achievements". A quick google search shows two Professional Publishing Awards for Diversity the other won by Vogue magazine. A search for the campaign magazine publishing awards winners 2020 shows FT and Telegraph also as winners. Seems legit RainbowWikiWarrior (talk) 00:05, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And yet, we have no articles on those awards. CUPIDICAE💕 00:07, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Praxidicae ... Campaign_(magazine) and also Professional_Publishers_Association, but yes, good one for AfC! RainbowWikiWarrior (talk) 00:14, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't make the award notable. Also every single source in PPA is PPA...so, no. CUPIDICAE💕 00:48, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merely responding to your question. From a Google news search, it’s clear to me that PPA awards is notable[1][2][3] ,perhaps not (yet) here on Wikipedia, but only because it is a badly put together article. I might have a go at it 🧐 though not really my area of interest. We digress, but I stand by my opinion re. the article about the magazine. RainbowWikiWarrior (talk) 09:05, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Happy Monday morning from bonnie Scotland! I agree with RainbowWikiWarrior, (hence citing those sources in the article). As an editor based in the UK, I corroborate that Campaign and PPA are notable sources, particularly for the publishing industry. Praxidicae, I see you've AfD'd the PPA article, I will help edit/improve that article and discuss it with you/others there! The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 11:48, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have since learnt in my edits on the Professional Publishers Association article that RainbowWikiWarrior's Daily Mail citation is a deprecated source WP:DAILYMAIL. But I'd like to support with further citations from Newsweek[4] (who call the PPA a "Respected Industry Body") and Business Insider [5]. This said, I understand that this discussion is not about the notability of the awards, but of the magazine ... so I will say no more on the awards. It only became related to the discussion under this opinion to Keep. The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 10:35, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:09, 10 February 2021 (UTC) PS. Modifying the vote to weak delete for now as I am looking more into the awards. At least one seems significant. (discussion below). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:35, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Piotrus. I would argue that under WP:NMEDIA the publication is a newspaper, magazine and journal that through reliable sources, meets two of the stated criteria:
1) That it has produced award-winning work (the notability of the awards being a subject of debate above). I see that the awards in question are not in the , but it seems that unless you're a sports writer, or human rights journalist, your industry award is not notable – (problematic!). There are people at the magazine that have won specific "writing awards" that are not listed, because I feel that's attributed to individual journalists, not the magazine or also its leadership, so it hasn't been included in the article.
2) Is a significant publication in ethnic and other non-trivial niche markets – in this case it is an List_of_LGBT_periodicals – admitting as I did in my opening statement above, that it seems very few of the publications on this list would be notable under this standard.
All of course, understanding that wider notability is what is in question here. I get it The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 11:56, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Cleaning Laddy, The notability of the awards is a complex issue. Generally, a rule of thumb holds true in my experience: awards that estabilish a subject's notability are themselves notable, because they received reliable coverage that called them significant etc. I am not seeing that here, but do ping me if you or anyone else stubs one or more of the relevant awards and I'll review the changes.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:07, 10 February 2021 (UTC) PS. I was doing more digging and the PPA award may be notable: [1]. But one notable award isn't enough IMHO to make the recipient notble. Ping me if more awards are claimed to be significant. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Piotrus Sorry, I'm a newbie, so please bear with me. I did a much-needed redraft of the Professional_Publishers_Association article this morning also AfD'd, that includes citations about the PPA awards – from verifiable secondary sources, like Newsweek, Business Insider and CampaignLive. Some of the sources are also already cited here below to help verify the PPA awards (and also the association) as that was up for debate.
Re: Campaign_(magazine) from what I understand it is the leading industry title for Media. The Campaign Publishing Awards is its awards programme, chaired by Spotify[6] and award winners in 2020 (as well as OutThere) included notable publications like the Financial_Times[7], The_Daily_Telegraph, Daily_Mail (although this is deprecated source on here – so maybe doesn't help), and The_Guardian[8]. (All these citations are by Campaign magazine themselves, though, not secondary). Through my (non-Wiki) connected logic, my opinion is that if Wiki recognises these award winners as perennial, verifiable, secondary sources and henceforce notable, wouldn't it then be fair to say that the Campaign Publishing Awards are notable themselves? Then coming full circle, back to the subject of notability for OutThere magazine (which is what is for debate on this page, not the awards), with OutThere magazine being a "publication in ethnic and other non-trivial niche markets" under WP:NMEDIA (in this case for the LGBTQ+ community), yet winning an award outside its usual scope that is usually awarded to industry giants, would that not constitute or at least support the magazine being notable? Just my two cents. I am also aware we could then go on to ask what makes OutThere "significant" as a niche market publication, but then we'll be here forever, and frankly I'm quite ready to move on. :) The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 12:42, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Piotrus From my research, OutThere won 2 PPA awards, one in 2013 for its launch and then it returned later in 2020 to win when it was more established. On the PPA awards website, it was also nominated as a finalist in 4 other categories, including Brand of the Year, Editor of the Year, Covid Response Initiative of the Year, Designer of the Year - again, against some notable mainstream publications.
- For its Campaign Publishing Awards/Campaign magazine, I've described above. It was nominated in 2 other categories as well – Business Leader of the Year (against the Financial Times); and Brand of the Year.
- For the Travel Media Awards (I understand the awards is owned by APL media that run National_Geographic in the UK), OutThere won for "Consumer Publication of the Year – Online", going up against the BBC,Lonely_Planet, The_Daily_Telegraph, Suitcase_(magazine), so again by my reckoning, this niche LGBTQ+, minority publication, beat four mainstream titles. I didn't say all of this in the article, because I felt that this is congratulatory and maybe mistaken for promotional/advert. As for this Travel Media Award's notability, I'll have to research that! I'll try do that tonight. The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 12:57, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Piotrus If it's any help while you're looking into awards, I've just seen that in 2020, the Campaign Publishing Awards changed its name from the British Media Awards, but still run by Campaign magazine. The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 17:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Piotrus Also, the The_Sunday_Times has called the Travel Media Awards one of two of the "most prestigious awards in travel journalism". The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 17:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@The Cleaning Laddy: Thank you. I find your arguments convincing (that the publication won enough major awards to be notable). I suggest you add links and redirects to the organizations giving them (in the article text) and try to add sources found to the relevant articles, so that future editors will know those awards are notable (and perhaps some of those awards need their own articles?). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: Thank you. I will. Just for clarity before I spend more time finessing this article. It's a "Keep" from you? I would also appreciate your review, perhaps after I have added the citations, to ensure that it remains neutral. And good point re. pages on the awards, I'll add it to my list of to-dos. Thanks in advance! The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 09:53, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP:HASREFS I have done more work (and reading of guidelines) to establish notability in this article. My closing arguments as follows.
Under WP:NMEDIA, OutThere magazine is considered notable because it satisfies one or more (two) of the following criteria:
1) WP:MULT It has produced award-winning work – full (and lengthy) arguments above for all four of the awards won over a timeframe of 7 years. Each are indeed notable and despite the magazine being niche media, it has won against some leading titles.
2) WP:NPERIODICAL It is indeed a "significant publication in ethnic and other non-trivial niche markets (LGBTQ+)". To demonstrate significance in the LGBTQ+ market/community/tourism, I have added the following –
- Considered an "Essential Resource for LGBTQ+ community"
- It created the Thai government's LGBTQ+ tourism outreach programme "Go Thai Be Free" and the first ever LGBTQ+ travel education event in South East Asia.
- It is a media partner of, and their editor serves on the board of the International Gay and Lesbian Travel Association, "world's leading travel trade association for LGBTQ+ tourism"
- GIBS, the Gordon Institue of Business Science considers it a "leading luxury and experiential travel magazine for gay men" and OutThere is used as a significant source in the writer's academic research on LGBTQ+ tourism
3) Is it TOOSOON?
- WP:CONTIN The magazine has been publishing and in print for 11 years under one owner – which is a long time for a periodical and been a notable award title-holder for 7 years. There have been continuous notable events (award wins) through its lifetime
The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 13:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added another resource. In a book written by a Senior Fellow of Massey_College,_Toronto University_of_Toronto, the magazine is considered "a material player in the advancement of LGBTQ rights." The Cleaning Laddy (talk) 20:51, 14 February 2021 (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.
  1. ^ Greep, Monica. "Edward Enninful thanks Vogue team behind Meghan Markle's 'Forces For Change' issue - but says 'moments of recognition' are 'bittersweet' after he became the first black person to be named Editor of The Year at PPAs". Daily Maill.
  2. ^ McIlheney, Barry. "The PPA show must go on: magazine Oscars turn 40". Campaign (magazine).
  3. ^ Donato, Al. "Meghan Markle's Vogue Issue Wins U.K. Press Diversity Award". Huffington Post.
  4. ^ Royston, Jack. "Meghan Markle 'Honored' by Award for 'Vogue' Issue Featuring Greta Thunberg". Newsweek.
  5. ^ Friel, Mikhalia. "Meghan Markle's British Vogue issue has won a diversity award a year after it was criticised for not including enough white people on the cover". Business Insider.
  6. ^ Staff. "Spotify's Rakesh Patel to chair Campaign Publishing Awards". Campaign magazine.
  7. ^ Staff. "Telegraph, FT and TTG top winners at 2020 Campaign Publishing Awards".
  8. ^ Staff. "Mail and Guardian honoured as Campaign Publishing Awards kick off". Campaign magazine.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/OutThere_(magazine)&oldid=1007029108"