Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/This WEEK in FUN: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Signing comment by 74.98.38.71 - "→This WEEK in FUN: " |
adding a note |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
*'''Delete''': I can't find [[WP:N|significant coverage]] for this podcast. [[User:Joe Chill|Joe Chill]] ([[User talk:Joe Chill|talk]]) 20:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''': I can't find [[WP:N|significant coverage]] for this podcast. [[User:Joe Chill|Joe Chill]] ([[User talk:Joe Chill|talk]]) 20:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''': This article seems to have a good chunk of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=This+WEEK+in+FUN&namespace=0 articles that link to it] internally and gets quite a few google hits. Although its not mainstream it is far from not notable. It is also one of the few non tech related podcasts on the [[TWiT.tv (network)]] further strengthening the reason for its inclusion. [[User:Andyzweb|andyzweb]] ([[User talk:Andyzweb|talk]]) 20:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''': This article seems to have a good chunk of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=This+WEEK+in+FUN&namespace=0 articles that link to it] internally and gets quite a few google hits. Although its not mainstream it is far from not notable. It is also one of the few non tech related podcasts on the [[TWiT.tv (network)]] further strengthening the reason for its inclusion. [[User:Andyzweb|andyzweb]] ([[User talk:Andyzweb|talk]]) 20:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC) |
||
::I am going to add a note that if this AfD passes I am going on a witch hunt for any other poorly cited or referenced podcasts on wikipedia and nominate the them for AfD [[User:Andyzweb|andyzweb]] ([[User talk:Andyzweb|talk]]) 05:59, 12 January 2010 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Delete''': No citations. Still no justifiable reason to have an entry. if Andyzweb wants it kept, put your money where your mouth is and rewrite the entire article. As it stands this is superfluous nonsense. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.98.38.71|74.98.38.71]] ([[User talk:74.98.38.71|talk]]) 03:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
*'''Delete''': No citations. Still no justifiable reason to have an entry. if Andyzweb wants it kept, put your money where your mouth is and rewrite the entire article. As it stands this is superfluous nonsense. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.98.38.71|74.98.38.71]] ([[User talk:74.98.38.71|talk]]) 03:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
Revision as of 05:59, 12 January 2010
This WEEK in FUN
- This WEEK in FUN (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Was tagged as CSD A7, but it has already been through CSD and PROD in the past, so I'm bringing it here to discuss. Reach Out to the Truth 20:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this podcast. Joe Chill (talk) 20:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep: This article seems to have a good chunk of articles that link to it internally and gets quite a few google hits. Although its not mainstream it is far from not notable. It is also one of the few non tech related podcasts on the TWiT.tv (network) further strengthening the reason for its inclusion. andyzweb (talk) 20:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- I am going to add a note that if this AfD passes I am going on a witch hunt for any other poorly cited or referenced podcasts on wikipedia and nominate the them for AfD andyzweb (talk) 05:59, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete: No citations. Still no justifiable reason to have an entry. if Andyzweb wants it kept, put your money where your mouth is and rewrite the entire article. As it stands this is superfluous nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.98.38.71 (talk) 03:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)