Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twin Cities Daily Planet

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) Left guide (talk) 16:39, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Twin Cities Daily Planet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Newspaper isn't notable. Article lacks sources. Eric Schucht (talk) 17:20, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The online newspaper is defunct, but Wikipedia has many articles that feature defunct periodicals. Four sources other than the TCDP are cited. Bigturtle (talk) 17:24, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sources in article seem fine? PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:45, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep there is independent coverage, but it's not substantial Monkeysmashingkeyboards (talk) 19:43, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sources seem to demonstrate independent significant coverage.
In addition as this is the 3rd or 4th newspaper nomination per the same nominator, I would like to perhaps advise the nominator to examine sources more throughly to match with the guidelines necessary for newspapers before initiating AfD where it may not be necessary. MayhemStoppingBy (talk) 16:35, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and here are some citations from a 10 minute surface-level search, although I agree with Monkeysmashingkeyboards that I was not able to find anything incredibly in-depth. I'm from WP:MINN and I have a feeling there must be a couple good profiles out there, it is just finding them that may prove difficult, since a keyword search shows TCDP cited in a lot of other research, but we'd have to file that down to coverage actually about the publication itself. WPMN folks might be able to help.
    • Haas, Tani (July–December 2007). "Do citizen-based media of communication advance public journalism's ideals? Evidence from the empirical research literature". International Journal of Communication. 17 (2). Bahri Publications. Gale A172249382. Jeremy Iggers, ethics columnist at the Minneapolis Star Tribune, heads a community website called the Twin Cities Daily Planet. Like the Madison Commons, the Twin Cities Daily Planet serves as a space for citizen-based news reporting and deliberation on political topics of concern to the racially and ethnically diverse populations of Minneapolis and St. Paul (see the websites of the Madison Commons, and the Twin Cities Daily Planet, for further details).
    • Konieczna, Magda (January 2, 2014). "Do old Norms Have a Place in New Media?: A case study of the nonprofit MinnPost". Journalism Practice. 8 (1): 49–64. doi:10.1080/17512786.2013.793511. ISSN 1751-2786. Retrieved October 4, 2025. the Twin Cities Daily Planet, a community-focused aggregator site that also publishes blog posts and articles about neighborhoods and communities in the Twin Cities
    • Kim, Nakho; Konieczna, Magda; Yoon, Ho Young; Friedland, Lewis A. (2016). "Sustainability Factors of Emergent Civic News Websites: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis Approach". Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 93 (4): 750–769. doi:10.1177/1077699016628807. ISSN 1077-6990. Retrieved October 4, 2025. The Twin Cities have the 16th largest television and radio market in the country (Arbitron, 2013). Their broadest local news network is led by the foundation-funded Twin Cities Daily Planet, which creates content and republishes articles and blog entries from neighborhood partners.

Unable to access but sounded promising

[edit]
Pingnova (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep per Pignova's analysis. The CJR article is an obvious example of an independent reliable secondary source. I would tend to say that the further discussion of the outlet in academic aspects coupled with the fact that its articles have been cited and referenced in many other news publications (see WP:NEWSNOTE, though this is not an officially adapted guideline yet).
See also [1] for another mention. Katzrockso (talk) 21:55, 4 October 2025 (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.