Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cable 8 Productions

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cable 8 Productions

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

Another student-run tv station with no notability. Only sourcing is the school's newspaper which clearly falls below the level of coverage required by WP:AUD. Rusf10 (talk) 01:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak conditional keep. The article is well written, and could be useful for students attempting to find information on the subject. However, you are correct in that there are extremely little sources, and more must be added to keep this article. startTerminal (haha wow talk page | startTerminal on irc) 04:19, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - From what I can tell, not enough coverage to warrant an article in an encyclopedia. Try to change my mind. -- kewlgrapes (talk, contribs) 09:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pending - Currently this would be a delete, but with such a high quality article it would be a big hit to lose it - there's a few mentions in different bits (one of their former directors went viral for a while, some other general ones about student-run tv). Hopefully I, or someone else, can find just 1 or 2 decent sources. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:54, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Individual editors' assessments of whether the article is well-written or not are not relevant to whether the topic qualifies for a Wikipedia article or not — and we'll never mind that my assessment is that this is trending in an advertorial direction rather than an encyclopedic one, because arguing about differing interpretations of article quality would be an irrelevant digression. The determining factor is whether it can be shown as the subject of enough media coverage, in unaffiliated sources, to clear WP:GNG — but this is not, as its only citations are to one of the same university's other student media outlets and a press release from the university administration. These are not independent sources for the purposes of establishing that a topic is notable. Bearcat (talk) 02:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nn. Szzuk (talk) 16:45, 28 April 2018 (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.