Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Cliche
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was delete. --Ezeu 07:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Notablity concerns. Was proded prod was remove so I listed it here. BJK 13:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply - Podcast is on a major podcast network, has advertisers, is featured on satelite radio. It is notable enough I believe. Many listeners in the 10's of thousands. Also note user is again known for tagging incorrect articles reffer to user talk page User talk:Whispering - Mike Beckham 14:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I get one news hit for it, which is not an article about the show, but merely mentioned advertising on podcasts in general. Thus, its not notable, unencyclopaedic, possibly vanity, et cetera. WilyD 15:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, according to the article it has had one advertiser and has been featured on satellite radio once. Recury 17:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Recury. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 22:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply, No it has consistent sponsor now from Earthlink as being part of the PodShow network. - Mike Beckham 02:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, As I said in past posts, sponsorship, radio and PodShow network. 10's Thousands of listeners warrants the article - Mike Beckham 02:55, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, Sure, why not? - Paul Tevis
- Delete nn — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.104.92 (talk • contribs)
- Delete Doesn't appear notable enough. We need to be really careful before accepting articles about Podcasts. Although this is more credible than a podcast produced by a 14 year old, or someone, the more articles we have about podcasts mean that people are going to think that it's OK to add articles about theirs. That preventive measure is not grounds for deletion, though. My reason is notability. The JPStalk to me 00:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply Unfortunately you have no clue as you have not read my reasonsing. It is notable, more so than most other podcast articles on here and deserves a article. Also: Vanity? I am not associated with the program just a writer here wishing to expand articles on media. - Mike Beckham 06:22, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, 203.206.241.221
- 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.