[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Tressless (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
All of the citations used in this article are either links to the forum itself, or trivial mentions of the form 'online forums like r/tressless' mentioned in articles about hair loss in general. This is not the significant independent coverage required by WP:GNG and WP:NWEB. I have looked and I have not been able to find any sourcing that would meet our requirements. This was moved into article space by a draft's creator after the draft was declined, so here we are at AFD. MrOllie (talk) 15:56, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's pretty uncharitable. It was explained and linked to directly multiple times in both NBC and a *leading* paragraph in NYT, has been in print, and is not merely mentioned in passing as you claim. & don't know if it's against some guideline I didn't see, but the article was moved out of draft after addressing and improving based on feedback, not directly after being declined. Quarkipedia (talk) 16:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- NBC mentioned it twice. Here are the full quotes:
Finasteride is also heavily touted on a popular website called Tressless, which is also an active community on Reddit.
andCORRECTION: ( June 10, 2024, 8:10 p.m ET) An earlier version of this article misidentified the website Tressless. It is active on Reddit, but not a Reddit community.
. The NY times is similar. That is a textbook example of a trivial mention. MrOllie (talk) 17:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)- I said "linked", it's used as a supporting citation in NBC further down the page. And it's the third sentence, and entire second paragraph in an NYT article, including print, it's not tucked into other text. But based on the consistent distortion in your comments today, indiscriminate deletions of useful but pedantically non-compliant text in other articles, and many complaints about you online, I'm guessing you know what you're doing, so ok. Quarkipedia (talk) 20:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- This discussion is about whether or not sources that contain significant independent coverage exist. Links are irrelevant to that. And making personal attacks is not going to help the situation - only providing sources that meet notability requirements will. MrOllie (talk) 20:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- I said "linked", it's used as a supporting citation in NBC further down the page. And it's the third sentence, and entire second paragraph in an NYT article, including print, it's not tucked into other text. But based on the consistent distortion in your comments today, indiscriminate deletions of useful but pedantically non-compliant text in other articles, and many complaints about you online, I'm guessing you know what you're doing, so ok. Quarkipedia (talk) 20:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- NBC mentioned it twice. Here are the full quotes:
- Delete: Doesn't meet WP:NWEB as all sources are either unreliable or trivial mentions. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 08:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: i think there is an unbolded Keep argument here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:GNG, brief mentions in articles about hair loss are not significant coverage. hinnk (talk) 08:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)