Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glitz* (Germany)


 * 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. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:39, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Glitz* (Germany)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

No significant coverage, fails WP:CORP. The only coverage I could find (2 or 3 low-impact articles) mentioned the launch alone, and the targetting of women, neither of which is special or provides notability to the network beyond "it exists". MacMedtalk stalk 15:58, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. WP:N is not established. --Artene50 (talk) 08:44, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment – Note that additional independent reliable third-party sources have been found. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:30, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 14:48, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 14:48, 6 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 02:31, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep It has enough news coverage to meet WP:GNG: It's only just launched so unsurprisingly most coverage focuses on its launch.  But those references also cover topics such as its ownership, which cable networks are carrying it, and programs shown, all of which may belong in a WP article. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:05, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep – This topic passes WP:GNG per 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Thanks to User:Colapeninsula for locating some of the sources I have cited in my !vote here. After careful review regarding the reliability of the sources and level of coverage in the respective articles, this topic certainly passes Wikipedia's General notability guideline. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:16, 16 July 2012 (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.