Deletion of Caledonian-Record

Comment: Sumnjim made a good point: don't use numbers in your arguments. Therefore, any argument citing the small circulation of the paper should be deemed invalid, as should Sumnjim's comment ("Not notable local newspaper for a town of approximately 7500") which cited the size of the town as a reason of non-notability. With that done, let's look at facts. This article has  many sources. That certainly seems "adequate", if not good, and certainly meets . It has a long and rich history: 170 years old and founded as "pro-Whig", which is most certainly a rarity. Also, it received a good deal of press coverage in regards to the court case with Lyndon State College, which would seem to have it meet : "'Significant coverage' means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but less than exclusive." It is also the only newspaper in the state to carry Ann Coulter's column. This adds to the uniqueness of the paper which is a part of its notability. It is also the first paper to publish online in Vermont: another first. The paper is the oldest in Caledonia County, Vermont: it would seem that it is quite groundbreaking. Now that the national coverage due to the court case has been added, this article seems to ''clearly'' meet notability guidelines. I fail to see why it should be deleted
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:N)

Comment: Anybody can have a ''claim'' to notability, because anyone can lie, I'm not saying they're lying in this article, but ''anyone'' can have a claim to anything, doesn't mean it has to be true or right. Anyways, about the article I agree with sumnjim, in  I have voted for several AFD's where a voter or the creator of the article says ''if you type xxx in Google, it comes up with 12,000 relevant hits'' So what?? we can't rely on googles page hits to write an encyclopedia! And to what TerriersFan said, I fail to see why the article on this newspaper will ''improve'' wikipedia. Just because it is a 170 year old newspaper doesn't mean we can put up on wikipedia, there are dozens, probably hundreds of newspapers someone could label "notable" that we don't need to put on wikipedia
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:BIGNUMBER)