Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Through the Bible with Les Feldick

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. ✗plicit 06:00, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Through the Bible with Les Feldick

[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)

Non-notable television series. No significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 22:46, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 22:47, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 22:47, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oklahoma-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 22:47, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. If it's really been through 984 episodes, as claimed, then it has some notability. Nonetheless, I have just made a comparison with La Source de vie, a religious (Jewish) programme that has been running weekly on French television for about 60 years (sometimes said to be the longest continuously running television series worldwide), more than 3000 episodes. It has no Wikipedia article -- not only not in English (not too surprising) but also not in French (definitely surprising). It is, however, a far more serious and intellectual programme than Through the Bible with Les Feldick appears to be, and directed to a far smaller audience. Athel cb (talk) 09:18, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Number of episodes isn't a notability criterion. SL93 (talk) 13:05, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:GNG. Its only mention in the news is a passing mention in an article about religious programming being on in a military building. While this was the program in question, it was not itself the point of contention in the article and the event was not itself particularly notable. JBLM investigating report of Christian proselytizing on base. Other than this, there are some mentions of him on a blog that notes he's somewhat well known among people who watch the bible on TV according to Phil Cooke. It just doesn't seem to me to cross the threshold of notability. snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 16:42, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 07:22, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 10:19, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Barely any mentions online, none of which are reliable (though there is this interesting page). Mostly referenced in blog posts, Youtube videos, TV and ebook sites—nothing substantial. Shells-shells (talk) 19:04, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without prejudice - In theory a show that has been in national syndication as long as it has should have enough reliable sources to warrant an article here, but as this article stands right now, there are only primary sources and no establishment of notability in independent coverage; it would need to be wholly rebuilt to bring it into compliance. I do not object to the page being reconstructed IF it can be brought to standard. J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 23:08, 29 November 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.