Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colors Kannada


 * 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 redirect to ETV Network. Will lock. S warm  ♠  06:09, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Colors Kannada

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete both Colors Kannada and Colors (TV channel) or possibly redirect each to ETV Network. The articles appear to address the much same topic, and do so without significant coverage. The coverage is either (1) internal from the channel itself or related parties or (2) slightly rehashed press releases (PRs), primarily cited from Biz Asia, itself a questionable source because of lack of fact checking. I did not find independent coverage (PRs not being independent). I did not find substantive coverage, except PRs. I did not find significant coverage. There are mere mentions aplenty because of programming notices, but no coverage of the organization/channel. It fails the general notability guideline, as well as WP:CORP. In particular see WP:CORPDEPTH and the policy at Self-published sources, note #9; see also the policy regarding questionable sources and the essay at Third-party sources. Note 1: Colors Kannada and the "Colors" franchise are part of ETV Network which is a subsidiary of Viacom 18, a joint venture between Viacom and the Network 18. Note 2: I originally created the title "Colors Kannada" as a redirect in January 2011‎. --Bejnar (talk) 19:45, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I should note that Wikipedia is not a directory applies here as well. --Bejnar (talk) 19:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * There is a tremendous glut of poorly sourced articles on broadcasters and channels that fail WP:GNG/WP:CORP and should be rolled up together until they meet the appropriate threshold, including a whole bunch more Colors channels. I am not sure exactly where the proper target is. I think that redirect and lock are better options than "delete" because of the likelihood of a user searching for content about the subject. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  20:49, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that redirect is certainly better from the user stand point, if we can keep people from repopulating the territory with this kind of directory data. As explained in the policy Encyclopedic content, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. --Bejnar (talk) 05:33, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Redirect permanently and lock it if there still isn't enough for a separate article. SwisterTwister   talk  06:29, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:43, 7 October 2015 (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.