Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Igloo (New Zealand)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Igloo (New Zealand)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Declined PROD, rational was: ''unlaunched product. no independent refs after months of existance. nothing in GNews but press releases and thinly disguised marketing materials. both partners in this joint venture already have pages and Sky Network Television in particular contains very similar information to this article, with a similar structure. COI and self-published tags removed by article creator.'' There are now two independent references, one from each of the big NZ web media news outlets; neither appears to contain any independent journalism, merely reporting what the three companies have said about the (still unreleased) product. Note that thong is new media company based in New Zealand which operates online communities serving the production, broadcast and viewing of television in New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the UK and not independent for the purposes on notability. If WP:RS with real coverage are added to the page, feel free to ping my talk page and I'll take another look. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, the topic meets the WP:GNG, about 15 hits on the NZ Herald website, several of which are beyond trivial. I think there is a bit much detail on subscriber options etc, which could be summarised. XLerate (talk) 23:35, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 15:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak keep: This article needs cleanup and expansion, especially in WP:NPOV writing and sourcing. That said, the product seems notable to me, and there is coverage. That said, I don't feel qualified to fix it myself, nor interested in doing so. - Jorgath (talk) (contribs) 17:43, 7 March 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.