Talk:22nd Century Media

Newspapers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Newspapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Newspapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NewspapersWikipedia:WikiProject NewspapersTemplate:WikiProject NewspapersNewspapers
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge from AFD

The daughter articles were put up for deletion with the result being to merge them here (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Northbrook Tower). All the information from the daughter articles was pretty much here so I just copy-edited this page and created rediercts to the appropriate sections. AIRcorn (talk) 05:12, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Aircorn: I would've G11d it but for that, and almost did anyway. The whole thing was pure puffery and full of marketing buzzwords (I should've done a word count on "hyper-local".) It's appreciated that you did the merge, but you're still responsible to ensure the resulting article is appropriate. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:42, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Seraphimblade: I don't know why you are having a go at me. I didn't nominate, !vote in or close the discussion. What I was doing was working through a backlog at Category:Articles to be merged after an Articles for deletion discussion (when I started there were 240 articles in that category and many - ~~including this one~~- were two years old). Hell I didn't even do a full merge, I just redirected the nominated articles (which is why I left the above message) and my tidy up consisted mainly of deleting information[1]. I am a volunteer here, like you, and I will take responsibility for my edits. But I am not going to take criticism for other peoples decisions or edits and I will respect consensus even if I don't agree with it. Anyway I don't even know what the big deal is, that deletion discussion was about articles that redirect here and if you don't think the article is notable then either speedy it or nominate it through WP:AFD. AIRcorn (talk) 21:19, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I double checked the dates and realised this is from a round of merging I did over three years ago (I thought it was from my recent attempts to reduce the backlog this year). The above still applies though as my process was roughly the same. AIRcorn (talk) 21:27, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Aircorn: @Seraphimblade: I think this is an unfortunate misunderstanding - while Aircorn did the heavy lifting of merging following an AfD discussion in 2013, I nominated this for speedy deletion and re-added WP:NOTABLE/WP:NOTPROMOTION tags yesterday. Maybe Seraphimblade mixed us up. Note that User:Frmorrison dubiously removed the one source/notability tags in January 2015, so I would not blame Aircorn - the page was properly marked to be substandard, even if a shady editor removed the relevant tags (see the history). Themulticaster (talk) 22:12, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Aircorn: Sorry, I might've misread what you said when disputing the speedy. Apologies if I did. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:02, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Seraphimblade: I never disputed the speedy so I think there has been some miscommunication going on. Apology accepted and no harm done. For what its worth I have no objection to it being speedied if that influenced your decision to decline. AIRcorn (talk) 03:24, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]