- 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) Erik9 (talk) 01:45, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Smartish Pace (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unremarkable ("obscure") poetry magazine. Fails WP:NOTABILITY. Claims to have published Pulitzer Prize winners, but notability is not contagious. Likely COI. Disputed prod. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:15, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Seems to be enough out there to justify keeping this article. I added link to a Chronicle of Higher Education article, and a few others. There are also other references to this journal in passing e.g., [1] (NYSun), which seem to justify both its existence and worth of having an article.--Milowent (talk) 17:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep, the coverage and the award should just scrape this one in over the notability bar, I think. Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:47, 13 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]
- Keep - Self-evident notability. Nice reference piece for offline resource. --AStanhope (talk) 03:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, obviously passes WP:GNG. Ironholds (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Passes WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 00:51, 15 September 2009 (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.