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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Utica Phoenix

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Lacks significant coverage by independent sources. Google only returns 5 pages of results, a portion of which is false positives, and the rest is trivial or connected (their social media, alumni mag mentions, etc.). There was one instance of substantial local coverage (they were sued in 2013) but it never received any attention outside of local news, so WP:AUD applies. GBooks doesn't turn up anything helpful, and neither do GNews and GNews Archive. Apocheir (talk) 03:43, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, News media, and New York. Apocheir (talk) 03:43, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non notable publication that got in trouble for defamation. Andre🚐 05:14, 14 August 2022 (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.