Talk:Newspaper Licensing Ireland
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 20 February 2008. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
|
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Deletion
[edit]I dont understand why this page is being deleted. could you please explain Newspaper Licensing Ireland (talk) 12:12, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well, the speedy deletion criterion used was A7, asserting that the article doesn't indicate the importance of the subject. I disagree with that. It might still be argued as promotional. I don't think it should be deleted, but it needs a lot of work, as indicated by my tags. SamBC(talk) 12:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- As a secondary note, you are likely to find that you will be blocked because of your username, as it is in itself promotional. You may wish to register with a name that is acceptable under the username policy. SamBC(talk) 12:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
"Threat" section
[edit]The recent activities concerning NLI sending letters to organizations is not noteworthy enough for inclusion here. As per WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, Wikipedia should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories. --HighKing (talk) 13:55, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
- There was no first-hand accounts in the section. Everything in the section was cited, and by removing it you also emptied the reference list. On what basis do you assert your claim that the section was not noteworthy? Rubensni (talk) 16:18, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
- I've already pointed out the policies above. What's more, press releases by McGarr Solicitors fails as per WP:PRIMARY, and the maman poulet blog fails per WP:SPS. More relevant - on what basis do you believe this news story is notable? --HighKing (talk) 13:15, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
It's notable because the tech press and other mainstream media are talking about it, worldwide. It's also notable because no print media in Ireland are touching it, despite it being covered by the likes of RTE on Morning Ireland. It's almost like all of the Irish newspapers were members of an organisation that could get together somewhere to agree a united position...
Admittedly, there weren't many secondary RS in May - there certainly are now. I'm going to restore the section and will extend/replace the references with RS secondary sources over the weekend. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 08:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Agree - story has now been sufficiently covered for notability and sources. --HighKing (talk) 16:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
External links modified (February 2018)
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Newspaper Licensing Ireland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130115001944/http://www.djei.ie/science/ipr/National_Newspapers_of_Ireland.pdf to http://www.djei.ie/science/ipr/National_Newspapers_of_Ireland.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:32, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Orphan article message
[edit]
Please help this orphan article by adding links to it in related articles and lists. Once it has an incoming link from at least one article or list, the orphan tag can be removed (disambiguation pages, redirects and draft articles do not count). Three or more incoming links are ideal. The Find link tool may help, but not in all cases.