Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ATV News (2nd 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. (non-admin closure) Schminnte ^{[talk to me]} 22:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ATV News (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Delete The article has been unreferenced for 16 years, and I cannot find any sources that would demonstrate WP:SIGCOV. Maybe this article could be merged with ATV? Tooncool64 (talk) 21:11, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep...from a cursory look the Chinese article has plenty of sources? Not all of them are perfect but I spot a lot more than 3 decent ones in there. Sources don't have to be English. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I agree with PARAKANYAA, not sure if WP:BEFORE was properly done, especially the B7 section. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 22:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To consider the sources in the Chinese Wikipedia article for GNG/SIGCOV etc.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 03:09, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep As the nom had nominated this inexplicably for speedy deletion as a hoax to start with along with this response on why they're deleting articles irrationaly, I don't feel this is a proper nomination at all and there's no issue with the sourcing in the article. Tooncool, please stay out of deletion discussions until you understand the process a lot more. Nate • (chatter) 03:47, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There is no sourcing for the article as current, that is the issue. Tooncool64 (talk) 03:54, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment That certainly doesn't answer my concern that you thought this was a hoax, then prodded, then took this to deletion when it's self-evidently notable as the network's news division. Why did you think this was a hoax in the first place when it was obvious ATV had a news division? And why are you asking for deletion when sources in its native language are easily available? Nate • (chatter) 15:43, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Initially I made a mistake tagging it has a hoax. At the time, I was not clear on WP policy, since then I have read much more about it since I first nominated this article for deletion. I still stand by it however, as I believe that the sources available on the Chinese Wikipedia do not demonstrate proper WP:SIGCOV. Tooncool64 (talk) 19:28, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment as I have already voted. I added sources to some stuff in the article, which discuss this station in depth - a lot discuss the general woes of ATV but a lot are about their news channel in specific. I would recommend future editors look through this for future expansion of this article, as there's a decent amount to expand on. I'd do it myself but rn i am very sick (and i am very lazy). PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:32, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep New sources hint at SIGCOV, and there is probably much more in Chinese. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:01, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per PARAKANYAA. 三葉草SanYeCao · Talk 01:04, 8 January 2024 (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.