Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Average Angler Adventures


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Average Angler Adventures

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The tv show exists, but there's no evidence it's notable. StarM 02:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  04:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable, regional show. --Ged UK (talk) 09:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom. Google suggests it's nn. Computerjoe 's talk 11:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete; lack of independent, reliable sources that offer more than trivial coverage. Karanacs (talk) 15:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep of the just now improved article as having "local" notability. It is no blockbuster, but is reviewed and written up by experts in their field and in that area. Yes... its no prime-time blockbuster, but for what it is and where it is, notability is notability. Many sports have only a "regional" notability, but regional does not matter (per WP:CSB), as long as they meet the notability requiremenst. As a sports fishing show, in a sports fishing area, and to sports fishing enthusiasts, this one kind of sneaks up on WP:N. One does not have to be a sports fishing fan to perhaps see that this works for them. It gets coverage, it gets reviews, and it gets multiple less-than-trivial mentions... all now added to the article by WP:ARS since its original nomination and included AFTER the above delete opinions were made.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: trivial coverage, insufficient 3rd party sources. JamesBurns (talk) 01:03, 25 February 2009 (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.