Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A World of Possibilities

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 was keep.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 20:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A World of Possibilities

A World of Possibilities (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

This is just an article about a radio show that is not very known. Sounds as an advertisement. Damiens.rf 23:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete. Non-notable, no sources, advert.Renee (talk) 23:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Very weak keep I would think that an "internationally syndicated" show might possibly be notable if verified. The generic title makes it hard to search for sources though. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 23:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak keep as it is "internationally syndicated", verified with this search, but appears to have very little third-party press coverage. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 23:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 04:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak keep Sources definitely serve for verifiability and an internationally syndicated show on hundreds of stations around the world is certainly notable. I do wish this was better sourced. - Dravecky (talk) 05:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. A verifiable widely syndicated show like this must be notable. However I must say that a sentence like "it is also heard in seven Canadian provinces and six foreign countries" really makes me cringe. Not all readers are are in North America. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Week Keep. There are a lot of garbage articles about non-notable, local only radio shows on Wikipedia, this isn't one of them. It's syndicated which certainly helps it's case, are there any more verifable sources for this article than the link above? --Rtphokie (talk) 03:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
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.