Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neoaztlan

: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. Fritzpoll (talk) 16:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

=[[Neoaztlan]]=

:{{la|Neoaztlan}} ([{{fullurl:Neoaztlan|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neoaztlan}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

I decline a CSD because journals don't fall under A7. However, it does not assert notability, and all I could find on Google were the Neoaztlan homepage, Twitter, Myspace, etc., but no reliable sources, so delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, A7 and A9 should be merged to simply cover any subject that does not assert some shred of importance/notability. The fact that we have to discuss this article because it is about a journal instead of a person or a song is a waste of time. Anyway, a dirty Google search turns up nothing but their own website, blog entries, Twitter/MySpace garbage and the like. Obvious delete. I admit I am very inclined to IAR speedy this anyway, but since it's been declined I'll forbear. Shereth 22:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
:I agree it should be expanded. But every time it's brought up at CSD talk, the proposal gets rejected. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:09, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Delete I barely find anything on this, just a (completely tangential) mention here: [http://sacurrent.com/news/story.asp?id=69189]. Cazort (talk) 22:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Deleteno library seems to know of it. The reason for not doing these by speedy is that it often turns out that some book or the like is in fact notable, though the first two people to look haven;t heard of it. A9 works because in that particular field, there's a safe criterion. . I've seen nationally known nominating prize winning children's books nominated for speedy, and similar. It takes time to let more people see the article. DGG (talk) 04:11, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Delete. No notability found. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Delete per notability concerns. Matt Deres (talk) 16:38, 1 July 2009 (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.