Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judge John Hodgman


 * 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) Mz7 (talk) 01:18, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Judge John Hodgman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-Notable Podcaster with no independent references provided. References in article link back to the podcaster's own page and a search on Google and Yahoo yield the same, links that only go back to the podcaster's own site and as stated before little if no independent coverage. TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 17:19, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 21 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Basic searches show that this podcast has received substantial coverage; examples include NPR, Rolling Stone , Paste Magazine , Huffington Post . --Arxiloxos (talk) 22:25, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep per (And I'll add to that list The Onion's AV Club). Not only do simple searches show that John Hodgman's podcast has received substantial coverage (it was even spun off into a feature in the The New York Times Magazine), many independent sources appear in the article. A bit of due diligence next time please, . I understand that many of the citations are episode links, but this is an artifact of the way the editor chose to cite the list of guest stars.  0x0077BE  ( talk ·  contrib ) 06:43, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep – References about the show were hard to find amid all the references to the show, but per comments above they do exist. – Margin1522 (talk) 08:06, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - As per above, article would be better served by a request for cleanup than by deletion. – Nowah Balloon (talk) 10:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - Clearly this article has several citations outside of the podcast itself. The podcast itself is notable and covered by many sources. Clearly the person asking for the RfD did not read the full list of citations before making their claim making this a clear choice for a Speedy Keep by rule. Inturnaround (talk) 22:02, 27 December 2014 (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.