Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Tuck Profit

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. - Mailer Diablo 11:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Tuck Profit

Non-notable online student newspaper, prod tag removed by author. Does not seem to meet Wikipedia:Notability (web). Maxamegalon2000 03:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete (A7) Sounds like an interesting project, but it's totally NN.--Húsönd 03:47, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. The editors seem to specialize in articles which will cause a reaction, and one such reaction is mentioned in the article: "Leela Damm T'06 responded with a front-page story in the Tuck Times the following month". That's one "non-trivial published work whose source is independent of the site itself." If a second published work can be found, such as an article in the university's faculty and staff newspaper, then notability is demonstrated. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I am extremely reluctant to even consider that a publication of the respective school would serve as a reliable, plausible, third-party source. Furthermore, claim to such source is unverifiable.--Húsönd 05:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Regarding this Tuck Times being a source for an article on the Tuck Profit, um ... no. I don't consider that an independent source (for all we know, the one is just a blow-off-steam spinoff of the other). Delete. --Dhartung | Talk 06:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Eusebeus 09:12, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. MER-C 11:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Recently started online paper, non-notable.Edison 14:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Neither notable, nor likely to become so.--Duncan 15:16, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per all above.UberCryxic 01:01, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. As the founder of the Tuck Profit (and relatively new to Wikipedia), not sure whether it's appropriate for me to comment in this forum (obviously I'm biased). I'm wondering how to prove that The Tuck Times is a real student newspaper at Dartmouth, as they do not have an online presence. Would scanned copies of the print publication be acceptable? By the way, the site receives between 30 and 400 unique visitors/day and is achieving notoriety among the Tuck School of Business alumni community. But I guess the relevant questions are 1) 'does this make it notable?' (yes, it's one of the top ranked business schools in the world) and 2) 'how can I prove this?' (which is where I need help!). Thanks! Christopherherbert01 23:37, 30 October 2006 (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.