Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XXX Action Clips Channel

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 wasDelete. The delete comments are based fully upon policy and guideline. The article remains unsourced, thus unverified, despite being almost two years old. -JodyB _talk 22:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

XXX Action Clips Channel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

This article was originally deleted as part of a group AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Channel Zero Inc.. DRV determined that the group listing was improper; therefore, this article is relisted individually. Delete, given lack of reliable sources and notability concerns, pending other opinions. Xoloz (talk) 13:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: article has enough info, it's not biased, it's notable, no reason to delete. MusiMax (talk) 14:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails N, zero reliable sources found. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 15:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep seems to be an actual cable channel? JJL (talk) 16:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Nothing there but yet another TV channel. Unless each channel automatically gets an article, I'd like to see some independent sources talk about this one first. --Minimaki (talk) 11:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still think the article is fine enough to stay. There are thousands of article out there that doesn't have references and they stay. The article will improve with time. This is a nationwide television channel that has been around for a few years and is growing, theres no other television channel like this in the rest of Canada (entire channel centred around only showing clips from films); I just don't think there it needs to be deleted. It's fine the way it is. MusiMax 17:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletions. —A. B. ^(talk) 03:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Cable channel with national distribution = notable. Keep. Bearcat 22:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Bearcat. GJ 00:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete sources needed to meet WP:N. It would help if it was expanded to include the ratings information. Gtstricky (talk) 16:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a national cable channel, how is that not notable? The article has enough information included that it should stay, I don't think that references from the web is the be all and end all as it relates to notability. Given the subject of the article itself is enough to satisfy the notability concerns, which with it being a national cable channel is enough for it to be notable. MusiMax (talk) 16:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The argument for deletion is not that the article's topic is irrelevant, we understand that it is a national cable network. However, if the article not satisfy the requirements of sources from WP:N and from WP:V, then we are dictated to delete it. SorryGuy 21:20, 7 December 2007 (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.