Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brains Matter

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 delete. czar 06:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brains Matter

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not pass WP:GNG. The current sources consist of deadlinks to WP:PRIMARY, WP:BLOG, and WP:RSSM sources. Searching on Google, Google News, Google News Archive, Google Books, Google Scholar, The Internet Archive, and Newspapers.com yield only passing mentions of the show (There are quite a few false positives). The article is basically an WP:ORPHAN with a single link from Australian Skeptics, which is a potential redirect target but given the complete lack of sourcing I don’t see the need to merge any content. There also doesn’t appear to be any vandalism in the edit history so I doubt there are any useful sources that have been removed in the past. TipsyElephant (talk) 14:11, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. TipsyElephant (talk) 14:11, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. TipsyElephant (talk) 14:11, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:40, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:58, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I am not seeing any reference for the article content that isn't passing, self-published or non-independent, usually all three. It appears never to have received the multiple independent detailed coverage that underlies notability. Agricolae (talk) 21:13, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:WEB per nom. SBKSPP (talk) 00:40, 16 October 2021 (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.