Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MaxTV - Telling It Like It Is

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 merge to Max Kolonko. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 01:37, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MaxTV - Telling It Like It Is

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

Aggrandizement; only sources are primary, and many don't support the accompanying passages. Article's primary author(s) have tried on numerous occasions to argue that Kolonko has made a "bullet proof case" proving who killed JFK. S/t/he/y even went to the trouble of creating pretty graphs that include no verification data. Article's issues include WP:N, WP:V, WP:SYNTH, etc. Potentially qualifies for speedy under C7, but I figured a discussion might be in order. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 22:20, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Described program is quite a significant impact on the views of the public and the reception of television stations in Poland (the criticism of the establishment in Polish media). It is the most popular current affairs program on YouTube in Poland. The reason for the removal of this article may not be contradictory views of readers with the views of Mr. Kolonko. Leave. --Kszapsza (user talk) 12:20, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This may well be factual; however, the article doesn't make its case. As it stands, it is a PR piece and nothing more, and fails all encyclopedic standards for inclusion. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 19:36, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean this article to be an advert anyway. Maybe it needs some more references, but it can be repaired easily in nearest future. Sentences like "MaxTV has influenced political and social discourse in Poland." etc. aren't added to promote Kolonko's channel, but they just tell facts and statistics of the channel. On the other hand – those graphs are used as data source and they testify to the popularity of channel. Because of such popularity topic is suitable to Wikipedia. I think it has encyclopedic (Wikipedia) style anyway. Leave.
Please don't delete article without another person vote or consideration of the matter of deletion --Kszapsza (user talk) 19:10, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:58, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:58, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 20:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of news media-related deletion discussions. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 20:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of politics-related deletion discussions. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 20:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (say) @ 12:59, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Max Kolonko. Seems like a clear choice to me. There are a whole lot of sources about this guy, mostly in Polish, so there's no question he is notable. The question is the extent to which MaxTV is notable beyond Kolonko himself, and I don't think that's the case, based on what I'm seeing. Nonetheless, his work does appear influential/notable. --— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 05:58, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No argument from me; the issue would be removing everything without a verifiable source, including the pretty graphics. Doesn't leave much. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 06:42, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michig (talk) 13:28, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Rhodo (w/o the gaudy charts and graphs please :)) -- dsprc ^[talk] 02:41, 3 February 2015 (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.