Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T+D

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. Not much discussion, so WP:SOFTDELETE -- RoySmith (talk) 14:22, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

T+D[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable publication FeralOink (talk) 06:03, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:11, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:11, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it stands. I did not find independent coverage of it under its current title, but there are a number of problems with such searches. The listed awards, with which I am unfamiliar, suggest that there might exist such independent coverage, but the lack of citation to the original sources for those awards is problematic. The awards themselves, since they are in a very specific area may not constitute notability by themselves without some WP:GNG coverage. --Bejnar (talk) 04:05, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you look under older titles because it seems to have only been T+D for a small part of its existence? I agree about the awards, but we can't base notability on only a small part of its history. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:53, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find much coverage of it under any name. It isn't called T+D anymore. Now it is TD, and seems to be primarily a publication offered as a membership benefit from its latest publisher, Association for Talent Development. I rewrote the article in order to make it less promotional-sounding, see see here. Even with my re-write, I am not certain if it should remain, but now the tone is appropriate for a WP magazine stub article rather than reading like an advertisement as before.--FeralOink (talk) 19:27, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the name change occurred in 2012 or 2013 but I can't find any source for that. I've spent enough time on this, and am still leaning toward Delete.--FeralOink (talk) 19:28, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:41, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:41, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 12:26, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 09:08, 18 July 2017 (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.