Difference between revisions of "Talk:The idler"
From ZineWiki
Jump to navigationJump to searchAlanlastufka (talk | contribs) (clearing up the rules) |
Alanlastufka (talk | contribs) (making myself clearer cause I'm always vague) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
This magazine and it's associated forum and publications provides an invaluable, dissident and contemporary view of modern society. In addition it provides a platform through which those disaffected with the ideals of contemporary consumer society can give voice to alternative thinking and concepts. This ZineWiki page is an essential point of contact for a publication which has very little large-scale media visibility. User: Fanthony 19th March 2007 | This magazine and it's associated forum and publications provides an invaluable, dissident and contemporary view of modern society. In addition it provides a platform through which those disaffected with the ideals of contemporary consumer society can give voice to alternative thinking and concepts. This ZineWiki page is an essential point of contact for a publication which has very little large-scale media visibility. User: Fanthony 19th March 2007 | ||
| − | ::*According to [[ZineWiki:Deletion_Policy_discussion#Deleting_Articles|this page here]] you must have been a member of ZineWiki for at least seven days ''and'' have at least five edits. As well-intentioned as you may be, new users cannot register just to vote on deletion articles. As InvisibleFriend stated, if you can relate the magazine to zines, awesome, if not, it's not for ZineWiki. [[User:Alanlastufka|Alan Fall of Autumn]] 10:21, 19 March 2007 (EDT) | + | ::*According to [[ZineWiki:Deletion_Policy_discussion#Deleting_Articles|this page here]] you must have been a member of ZineWiki for at least seven days ''and'' have at least five edits to vote on article deletions. As well-intentioned as you may be, new users cannot register just to vote on deletion articles. As InvisibleFriend stated, if you can relate the magazine to zines, awesome, if not, it's not for ZineWiki. [[User:Alanlastufka|Alan Fall of Autumn]] 10:21, 19 March 2007 (EDT) |
*The criteria for inclusion on Zine Wiki isn't based on whether or not the ideals of a publication are laudable or not. Certainly ''The Idler'' may be, although I haven't seen it. But Zine Wiki, instead, is interested in accumulating a database of '''zines'''. If Zine Wiki chose to document magazines, then every publication you see on newstands would be included. The very few magazines that have been included are those that are relevant to zines; magazines that consistantly review zines, or are edited by former zine editors, or once were zines. If the article could establish some relevance to zines, zine making or personal publishing, that would go a long way towards justifying its inclusion. Zine Wiki shouldn't be a point of contact for magazines, however much we may sympathize with their content. Such magazines could develop their own "Magazine Wiki" for such purposes, couldn't they? Zines, generally without access to newsstands, professional publishers and visibility, already exist outside of consumer society, Fanthony. Their existance, means of production, and purpose can be read as a statement of dissidence and therein lies the value of their documentation. Zines already are a platform for voices of alternative thinking and concepts. There isn't a need for magazines, however well-meaning, to offer what already exists. Zine editors are already aware that they have an alternative platform in which to make their voices heard and Zine Wiki documents their efforts. | *The criteria for inclusion on Zine Wiki isn't based on whether or not the ideals of a publication are laudable or not. Certainly ''The Idler'' may be, although I haven't seen it. But Zine Wiki, instead, is interested in accumulating a database of '''zines'''. If Zine Wiki chose to document magazines, then every publication you see on newstands would be included. The very few magazines that have been included are those that are relevant to zines; magazines that consistantly review zines, or are edited by former zine editors, or once were zines. If the article could establish some relevance to zines, zine making or personal publishing, that would go a long way towards justifying its inclusion. Zine Wiki shouldn't be a point of contact for magazines, however much we may sympathize with their content. Such magazines could develop their own "Magazine Wiki" for such purposes, couldn't they? Zines, generally without access to newsstands, professional publishers and visibility, already exist outside of consumer society, Fanthony. Their existance, means of production, and purpose can be read as a statement of dissidence and therein lies the value of their documentation. Zines already are a platform for voices of alternative thinking and concepts. There isn't a need for magazines, however well-meaning, to offer what already exists. Zine editors are already aware that they have an alternative platform in which to make their voices heard and Zine Wiki documents their efforts. | ||
:Is there a possibility that some relevance to zines can be established in the article? Is it possible that this magazine is self-published, as are zines, and this fact can be noted? Is this publication, in fact, quite similar to a zine, in the way that, say, [[Punk Magazine]], although called a magazine is, in essence, a zine? [[User:InvisibleFriend|InvisibleFriend]] 07:52, 19 March 2007 (EDT) | :Is there a possibility that some relevance to zines can be established in the article? Is it possible that this magazine is self-published, as are zines, and this fact can be noted? Is this publication, in fact, quite similar to a zine, in the way that, say, [[Punk Magazine]], although called a magazine is, in essence, a zine? [[User:InvisibleFriend|InvisibleFriend]] 07:52, 19 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 15:33, 19 March 2007
I nominate this page for deletion. I'm sure they can afford to advertise elsewhereInvisibleFriend 13:44, 9 March 2007 (EST)
- Strongly Against. Advertise? I thought the wiki was a way of developing a database of zines. It's not about advertising. The Idler makes no money anyway and is constantly in the middle of a major cashflow problem. It is never certain that the next issue will make it. (Angry candy 11:23, 18 March 2007 (EDT))
Strongly against
This magazine and it's associated forum and publications provides an invaluable, dissident and contemporary view of modern society. In addition it provides a platform through which those disaffected with the ideals of contemporary consumer society can give voice to alternative thinking and concepts. This ZineWiki page is an essential point of contact for a publication which has very little large-scale media visibility. User: Fanthony 19th March 2007
- According to this page here you must have been a member of ZineWiki for at least seven days and have at least five edits to vote on article deletions. As well-intentioned as you may be, new users cannot register just to vote on deletion articles. As InvisibleFriend stated, if you can relate the magazine to zines, awesome, if not, it's not for ZineWiki. Alan Fall of Autumn 10:21, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
- The criteria for inclusion on Zine Wiki isn't based on whether or not the ideals of a publication are laudable or not. Certainly The Idler may be, although I haven't seen it. But Zine Wiki, instead, is interested in accumulating a database of zines. If Zine Wiki chose to document magazines, then every publication you see on newstands would be included. The very few magazines that have been included are those that are relevant to zines; magazines that consistantly review zines, or are edited by former zine editors, or once were zines. If the article could establish some relevance to zines, zine making or personal publishing, that would go a long way towards justifying its inclusion. Zine Wiki shouldn't be a point of contact for magazines, however much we may sympathize with their content. Such magazines could develop their own "Magazine Wiki" for such purposes, couldn't they? Zines, generally without access to newsstands, professional publishers and visibility, already exist outside of consumer society, Fanthony. Their existance, means of production, and purpose can be read as a statement of dissidence and therein lies the value of their documentation. Zines already are a platform for voices of alternative thinking and concepts. There isn't a need for magazines, however well-meaning, to offer what already exists. Zine editors are already aware that they have an alternative platform in which to make their voices heard and Zine Wiki documents their efforts.
- Is there a possibility that some relevance to zines can be established in the article? Is it possible that this magazine is self-published, as are zines, and this fact can be noted? Is this publication, in fact, quite similar to a zine, in the way that, say, Punk Magazine, although called a magazine is, in essence, a zine? InvisibleFriend 07:52, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
