Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IBN Sports


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 04:48, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

IBN Sports

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No evidence of passing WP:WEB. -- aktsu (t / c) 20:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete All the sources currently in the article appear to be press releases or links to the IBN sports site. There does not appear to be any reliable sources that discuss the site to establish notability   GB fan  talk 00:34, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * Do you consider Reuters a reliable new source? "IMG and iBN Sports Announce Worldwide Distribution Pact" - http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS178373+26-May-2009+MW20090526 Eckinc (talk) 17:55, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Reuters is a reliable source, but this "article" appears to be a press release. From the sound of it, IMG and iBN sports wrote the "article" so it is not a reliable source to establish notability.  GB fan  talk 19:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You've clearly never heard of IMG. IMG is a global leader in event management and talent representation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMG_(business).  Your requirements for a "reliable source" seem questionable. Eckinc (talk) 23:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not sure what I said to make you think I have not heard of IMG before, but I must not have been clear in my statement. To establish notability you need to have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article.  Since the Reuters article is not independent of IBN sports it is not significant coverage that establishes notability.   GB fan  talk 13:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 23:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete The article is not based on independent reliable sources. The Reuters "article" is in fact a press release, which does not stabilish notability. Algébrico (talk) 01:43, 10 October 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.