Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/User-generated TV

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. - Mailer Diablo 22:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User-generated TV

Procedural relisting. WP:PROD deleted, but contested after deletion, so article was speedily restored. The original PROD reason was "Neologism without widespread use ( <1000 G-hits)". I am not sure whether the term is gaining popularity, so I abstain. Kusma (討論) 14:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep It seems important enough, based off the news articles (cnet and BBC). .V. 15:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. It is borderline notable now and seems to be catching on, so let's err on the side of caution. Michael Kinyon 06:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep At the time the article was originally deleted, "user-generated TV" had 979 G-hits and "user-generated television" had 212 G-hits. So I was going to ask if it was possible to sum these two numbers together to get over the 1000 threshold. However, looking at google this morning, there seems to have been some kind of methodological change or something, because now "user-generated TV" seems to get 10,600 hits. I promise this was not my doing ;-) Billbell 11:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NEO--Peta 05:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep This does not appear to be a passing fad. Major companies are spending millions to get into this market and I only forsee this becoming an even larger and more commonplace form of communication.--Saintlink 05:46, 12 September 2006 (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.