Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Orange Bowl broadcasters


 * 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 no consensus‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Strong arguments on both sides, with no rough consensus. Owen&times; &#9742;  13:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

List of Orange Bowl broadcasters

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Also, mostly unsourced per WP:RS. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, American football,  and Lists. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep, the Orange Bowl is one of the most important bowl games, see, , , , Esolo5002 (talk) 16:33, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * WP:ROUTINE and WP:ITSIMPORTANT applies. This is not about the notability of the games itself. SpacedFarmer (talk) 16:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete simply due to failing WP:LISTN. WP:NOTTVGUIDE—"An article on a broadcaster should not list upcoming events, current promotions, current schedules, format clocks, etc."—does not apply here, as the article in question is neither an article on a broadcaster nor does it list upcoming or current content. Dmoore5556 (talk) 18:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:LISTCRUFT and WP:ROUTINE mentions that create a WP:TRIVIA list that doesn't meet notability. Conyo14 (talk) 22:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * You're practically speaking very subjectively when you state that this is another case of something to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans, especially without accompanying evidence to backup such a general statement. It almost sounds like your your saying that something like this shouldn't be around because you personally don't care, heard much of, or understand or have much reverence college football or its history and background. Just because it may not personally appeal to you doesn't instantly mean that there's otherwise, little merit in something like this. BornonJune8 (talk) 11:50, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * When I said, I meant this list, not the sport as a whole. Did you pay attention to that? Of course not. As an non-American, we all know how popular the sport is to you Americans. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * NB: This user (BornonJune8) has a history of exclusively targeting my AfD with a keep vote, despite how weak they are. This was because I nominated one of his article for AfD. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Did you pay attention to that? Of course not. Please keep it civil. Zanahary (talk) 09:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: Sources dating back to the 1950s on television are being added at this very moment. And more will soon come to help bolster the WP:RS needs. BornonJune8 (talk) 10:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Source is about an announcment of an analyst, the other is an announcment of TV coverage. SpacedFarmer (talk) 14:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Relisting so that added sources can be further reviewed. Also, please no personal comments about contributors and accusations about motivations that are obviously unsupported. Focus on policy, sources and notability. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:20, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * As of now, there are at least 70 different references, and almost 60 just recently added in regards to not only CBS' earliest television coverage of the Orange Bowl, but their coverage in the 1990s. There also are now references/sources that have been added for NBC's television coverage from the 1960s on through the early 1990s and Fox's coverage during the late 2000s. Sources for ABC's during the late '90s and first portion of the 2000s and ESPN's coverage from the 2010s on through the present day just need to added as well as sources for the radio coverage. BornonJune8 (talk) 9:48, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I had a check: some focuses heavily on the games with the coverage being a side piece, some are WP:PRIMARY, some are announcments or talk about the announcers, some are 404. Like Wikipedia, you know that IMDB does not count as a reliable source. SpacedFarmer (talk) 10:43, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. This list was almost entirely unsourced when it was nominated at AfD. In just a couple days of effort, some 70 sources (of varying quality) have been added. Combine the ongoing sourcing effort with the fact that this was for nearly a century one of the big three college football games (Rose, Orange, Sugar), I lean to keeping. Cbl62 (talk) 19:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Final relist. Keep or delete? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep I expect the article to improve though. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 00:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment I have reviewed the sources and I'll chalk it up to this, IMDb is not a reliable source, press releases are WP:ROUTINE mentions, WP:NYPOST, and finally, there are some sources that are reliable, but do not provide the significant coverage that are necessary to sustain such a grouping. Therefore, it is within the topic of WP:LISTN, that my !vote remains. Conyo14 (talk) 07:06, 31 May 2024 (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.