Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Get Played


 * 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 keep. per identified sourcing Star   Mississippi  17:31, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Get Played

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Zero sources found in a WP:BEFORE. Current sources don't seem reliable. Doesn't seem to be a notable podcast. Tagged for notability 3+ years. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:37, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Websites. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:37, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * delete per nominator. Andrevan@ 21:39, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: I did a WP:BEFORE and thought I'd put what I discovered here in the AfD.


 * The following are useful in demonstrating notability: The A.V. Club article about the show's episode on Sonic appears to contain more than a trivial mention (it contains more than 100 words). Both the Vulture articles appear to be more than a trivial mention.  The IndieWire article appears to be more than a trivial mention.


 * The following were possibly useful in demonstrating notability: The A.V. Club article about the Native American Heritage Month episode doesn't appear to be independent of the the podcast, but the Indian Country Today source might count. I'm not sure if Vents Magazine is reliable considering the about pages says the magazine is "run by a team of dedicated volunteers." The Paste Magazine article appears to be potentially circular in that it references the Wikipedia page. Podcasting for Dummies contains a short paragraph about the podcast, but it's probably considered a trivial mention.


 * The following were not useful in demonstrating notability, but I thought I'd mention them anyway: The Digital Trends article and the Kotuku Australia article appear to only contain trivial mentions of the show (they contain less than 100 words). An article by Matthew Girard was republished in digital publications such as the Woodford Times, Victorville Daily Press, and the Pontiac Daily Leader as well as quite a few print publications such as The Naples Daily News, however, it doesn't contain any more than a trivial mention.    The Podcast Host article appears to be written by a contributor and the site appears to be a blog. The G-Loot website and the Stitcher article appear to be blogs.  The Stuff.tv article is sponsored. Giant Bomb published a primary source that could be useful, but doesn't contribute to notability.


 * Keep because the A.V. Club, Vulture, and IndieWire sources demonstrate that the subject passes WP:GNG and WP:WEBCRIT. The depth of coverage is definitely questionable so if it is determined that the subject is not notable enough for a stand alone article then I think it should be merged or redirected to Earwolf. TipsyElephant (talk) 14:24, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to Earwolf as a WP:ATD. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Weak Keep per TipsyElephant's response. I would've liked to see at least one in-depth source solely about the podcast but per WP:GNG a subject doesn't need to be the main topic so long as it isn't a trivial mention, and there's enough detail about the podcast to warrant entry on this site. EDIT I also stumbled upon this extra Vulture source listing it as among the best podcasts of 2019, similar to the other lists it was mentioned in. It's 225 words so this along with the other sources should demonstrate a stronger case for notability, and can be used for a decently fleshed out Reception section. To be generous I'm changing my vote to a keep. PantheonRadiance (talk) 06:27, 19 July 2022 (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.