Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pure Pwnage (3rd nomination)

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 Keep. — _Maggot^Syn 05:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pure Pwnage

No reliable sources, seems to be basically a vanity piece about an amateur tv program Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 01:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It has been the subject of multiple independent, reliable sources: ABC2 Australia - Good Game, The Escapist, as well as at least two AfDs resulting in keep. While it is indeed a series of amateur "webisodes", it does seem to be extraordinarily popular within the gaming community. --Canley (talk) 02:16, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep - a viewer base of three million isn't non-notable. Also technically it is no an amateur tv program either, as it is neither produced by amateurs, nor on tv. --T-rex 02:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. Canley (talk) 03:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article is full of cruft, yes, and uses too many primary sources to verify its own content, and could therefore use cleanup with a chainsaw and blowtorch. However, it does demonstrate at least minimal notability, and has lots of attention on google, so I'd like to see a sincere effort in rewriting a proper article before contemplating deletion. Ham Pastrami (talk) 03:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Article is indeed notable; it just needs general cleanup, particularly with verifiable references. MuZemike (talk) 18:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep This article has passed two other deletion reviews. It has obviously established notability, what is the point of going through all this again?Snake6 (talk) 20:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notability is not in question. User:Krator (t c) 00:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this article - Pure Pwnage is an enjoyable program and is one of the first made for internet only shows. It is more groundbreaking than people realize right now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.6.170.99 (talk) 17:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - it has devote followers, millions of hits, its own subculture, episode's premiere in theatres with thousands of poeple watching, well know throughout the World. I see no real reason for deletion. 4v4l0n42 (talk) 22:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The show has shown Ground breaking innovation for showing sides of the gamer community few people do not see.It has a good audience from around the world.The Program is no where amateur.Just because the show is made from a independent company doesn't mean it doesn't have creditability.The editing, acting, soundtrack,storyline, and quality are up to standard compared to TV shows and at sometimes Innovated.The show uses the internet so they can stay away from Seasonal schedules like TV shows, do to the fact they must have certain games that wouldn't be available at the time if they were to scheduled it like a TV series.The entire series has invented some of the most original characters that even Hollywood has failed to come up with.The show proves from time to time to use effects that are up to Hollywood studio standards.The show would be a hit on any network,but again they have to keep it to the internet for keeping Artistic Integrity,certain props needed I.E. Games because again the shows content, to avoid contracts and to keep original rights to the show.verification can be done in the following ways if needed, Articles done about the show in Know respected magazines, TV interviews from Networks, site hits from the official site using a IP counter when a episode is released,Ticket sales from a Live premier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.54.65 (talk) 02:45, 27 June 2008

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.