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) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 19:46, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Heroldo de Esperanto (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

63 results on Google for "Heroldo de Esperanto", no sources, and full of red links to non-notable entities. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 19:55, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Covered in multiple books, including [1] [2] [3]. Arguable whether it is more appropriate to have an article about Teo Jung than the periodical, though its subsequent resurrection suggests the latter. Bakazaka (talk) 20:19, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:21, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:21, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:21, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:21, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:22, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Looks to be notable enough for an article. Long-running magazine. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:15, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -- While Esperanto is very much a minority language, it is by far the best known of the "invented" languages. This appears to have been a long-running periodical, even if publication has latterly been sporadic. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:24, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I was unsure about this, since much (though not all) of the reliable material found is about the editor, not the subject itself. Some looking round led me to an appropriate explanatory supplement that lets me run off a criteria for my first time (functionally Peterkingiron's reasoning) - criterion 5 "are significant publications in ethnic and other non-trivial niche markets" in Wikipedia:Notability (media)#Newspapers, magazines and journals. Esperanto is a fairly significant niche market, and this clearly was significant (if likely no longer). As notability is lasting, this is a Keep. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:13, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I also found the books mentioned by Bakazaka, and agree it meets Wikipedia:Notability (media)#Newspapers, magazines and journals. I also find scholarly article references, eg 'Publishing for a diaspora: The development of publishing in the international Esperanto movement' [4], one in The Multiple Realities of Multilingualism: Personal Narratives and Researchers’ Perspectives [5], and a source of data for two papers in Interlinguistics: Aspects of the Science of Planned Languages [6]. The number of Google results is not a criterion for deletion (and contra Nom, I get far more than 63!), nor is the lack of referencing in the article. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:21, 16 November 2018 (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.