Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Green Zebra (publication)

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 as guidebook of no national significance. —Crazytales (t.) 14:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Green Zebra (publication)

Green Zebra (publication) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable guide book. First several pages of non-wiki, non-tomato ghits do not mention this guide in any way, with the exception of their own web site. contested prod Fabrictramp 23:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. Author of article (though not the original author). I addressed these very same reasons for deletion when I removed the prod tag. My response is given again: The subject has been described by outside sources. Notably, the San Francisco Chronicle published a lengthy article about it. A specific Google search turned up many more independent articles (though admittedly from sources with less reputation). Here are a few I easily found on just the first and second pages of search results: [1] [2] [3] [4] The article could definitely use some expansion, especially with the San Francisco Chronicle or others used as a reference, but that will come in time. With a lengthy article from the major press and several more from the minor/indie press, I believe it meets notability and verifiability requirements. -kotra 23:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Their Media Coverage page has some more possible sources: [5] -kotra 00:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: I reworded the article for NPOV and encyclopedic tone, and added two references (the San Francisco Chronicle and the Green Zebra website). -kotra 23:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Notability appears to be lacking and, in any case, the coupon book is really only of interest in San Francisco, hence the single article in a major publication. The company website and mentions in green-oriented indy press outlets aren't independent sources. —Travis^talk 00:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
• Move to Green resource guide. I get the idea, which is someone making a guide businesses that follow good ecological practices. I'll be surprised if this "Green Zebra" is the first, or only, such guide, but as a concept, it's notable. Mandsford 02:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment When I originally prodded, then nominated this for AfD, the sources now in the article weren't there. With the sources added, I'm now neutral about the article. It seems locally notable, but I'm not convinced it has notability outside the immediate SF area. --Fabrictramp 13:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per User:TravisTX. I agree with those editors who implied that this might be a Keep if there were some evidence of any national significance. Checking through some of the Google hits, I only noticed two accounts where the writer had done any interviews for the story. The others mostly seemed to be writing up (and commenting on) the press release. If reporting on this idea spreads outside the SF area, the article might be re-created. So far the SF Chronicle article is by far the best writeup; if there were more like that, a Keep should be considered. EdJohnston 04:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I keep seeing this coupon book described as a "resource guide." This is, as far as I can tell, nothing more than a highly localized, limited-scope version of the nationally distributed Entertainment Book. Please note this YouTube "review" of the book. —Travis^talk 12:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

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.