Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of channels available on SkyCable


 * 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 all.  Majorly  ( Talk ) 13:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

List of channels available on SkyCable

 * — (View AfD)
 * The article List of DirecTV channels was added at 22:11 on 26 December 2006. --myselfalso 15:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The articles listed below were added four days after the discussion began. --- RockMFR 05:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The articles listed below were added four days after the discussion began. --- RockMFR 05:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a TV guide. Contested prod. MER-C 02:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - an advert. CyberAnth 02:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - I was one of the first authors of this article. I have patterned this after the List of DirecTV channels article. And that article didn't sound like an advert. The least I could do to make the article in question not sound like an advert is to delete the "About SkyCable" section. (That sounded like an advert to me.) I'd also remove the "Exclusive to SkyCable" line on the Technical Notes column. I think I'll do it now. PinoiBIGscientian 02:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know about that one. Added to this AFD. MER-C 03:11, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Can anyone please properly define "TV guide?" In WP:NOT, the only expample on "guide" is on a radio guide. "For example, an article on a radio station generally should not list upcoming events, current promotions, phone numbers, schedules etc., although mention of major events or promotions may be acceptable."(~From Wikipedia is not a directory) which makes the discussion of a TV guide issue very hard. But judging from the given example, listing radio stations is not included. This article does not show any "upcoming events, current promotions, telephone numbers, schedules, etc." From my level of knowledge (3rd year high school student), a TV guide is a guide of program schedules. This is a channel lineup. Simple logic. So, my stand is still a strong keep.(P.S Please forgive my online temper today.) pinoiBIGscientian 08:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong delete. It doesn't sound like advertising, but there's really no reason for this to be here.  As the AFD points out, we're not TV Guide, and really, it's up to the cable providers to provide this to their users. --Dennisthe2 02:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Point of Information: In that case, there's a whole bunch of articles just like this that you have to delete, sourcing from DirecTV, Dish Network, XM. It feels unfair that "TV guides" from Philippine cable operators are being held first. I was waiting for articles just like this from U.S. cable operators to be deleted before I can approve of the deletion of the article in question. And besides, the TV guide that I interpreted from Wikipedia is not a TV guide are showing schedules of individual channels, and not channel listings. PinoiBIGscientian 03:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pointer, and the point of information. Note that we can't get to all the cruft in here in one go.  For what it's worth, I think that the one for SkyCable here got targeted only because it got noticed first.  Please remember to assume good faith in these cases.  --Dennisthe2 03:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yep, these two just got noticed first. The rest could be prod fodder once this nomination gets closed. MER-C 03:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment, the lists of channels for DirectTV, Dish Network, Sirius, XM, ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, MNTV and CW stations/affiliates were nominated for deletion on November 13, 2006, with a result of keep; in addition, the listing of MNTV affiliates was nominated for deletion in August 2006, also with a resulting vote of keep.


 * Keep Considering that recent discussion on this subject was barely two months ago Previous discussion and nobody here has offered any rebuttal of that decision, I say keep, and just short of speedy. If you can argue with that discussion, that might be worth a start.  FrozenPurpleCube 03:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * In the last discussion, at least half of the keeps were WP:ILIKEIT votes. And no-one effectively counteracted Wikipedia != TV guide. At least we're getting some real debate here. MER-C 07:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I think you missed the parts where people said why a list of channels is not a TV guide then. There are several quite relevant arguments made there, much more substantial than ILIKEIT.  A list of channels or even a list of programs is not the kind of TV guide that's been warned against.  Now if this network used a wide variety of different programming blocks, then there might be arguments against this list, but it wouldn't be because it's a TV Guide. In any case though, it is important to be aware of the prior discussion. FrozenPurpleCube 15:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep We've already had this discussion. This is not a TV Guide, this is a list of channels.  If it were a guide, it would have a list of programs when run and the time which it is.  --04:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT and WP:NOT. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tarinth (talk • contribs) 05:48, 27 December 2006 (UTC).
 * Strong Keep, This is an old discussion. The DirecTV listing was nominated for deletion along with lists of ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, CW, MNTV, Dish Network and XM channels less than two months ago. The general consensus was that the lists of channels offered by each service, as long as they did not include detailed guide-type listings, did not constitute TV Guide as noted in WP:NOT. Nothing has changed since that point. Each of those nominations resulted in a finding of keep. I urge those prior decisions to be upheld, as nothing has changed in the interim. --Mhking 07:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment, Each of these listings (I can't speak for SkyCable) grew out of their parent articles. They do not constitute a TV Guide-type listing; they are an indication as to what stations are associated with the network/satellite company, not unlike the list of teams in the NFL or the templates of stations in each television/radio market. I want to WP:AGF, but this AfD feels more arbitrary than anything else. --Mhking 17:16, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, meets content policies. A merge might be something to consider, but personally I think this information makes more sense in a separate article.  JYolkowski // talk 23:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pointless and ever-changing list. The only people who need this are the subscribers, and they're already getting that information. --Calton | Talk 04:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * POI. There are lots of things that are ever-changing that are in Wikipedia. Politics is ever changing, culture is ever changing.  There is an article on the War in Somalia.  That's a war in progress.  How about the article on the War on Terror, the War in Iraq?  Also, there are other people who might want to read this article, who are not subscribers.  I think it's valid information to include a list of channels that DirecTV provides as their service.  To list what the channels broadcast would clearly be a tv guide, and this is what Wikipedia is NOT; the List of channels DirecTV provides for its subscribers is clearly not a tv guide.  TV Guide goes to that next step.  As far as I'm concerned, as I read it and interpret WP:NOT, DIR only refers to TV guides such as what's in the newspaper, or the aforementioned magazine.  AND, most importantly, NO ONE HAS YET TO SAY HOW EITHER OF THESE ARTICLES CONSTITUTES A TV GUIDE.  I ask, how is List of DirecTV channels a tv guide?  When I look at the page, where are the upcoming events on those channels?  I don't see what time Mythbusters is on.  That's why I go to tvguide.com for that.  --myselfalso 05:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as Yellow-pages-like advertispamlistcruft. Also all other lists mentioned by Mhking.--Ioannes Pragensis 11:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * POI. Do you care to explain why this, along with other channel listings, became implied spam? And do you know what Yellow Pages are? They're a list of companies, along with their contact details. A channel list is nowhere near those. pinoiBIGscientian 12:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep As many people already stated, many of these listed were nominated on November 7 on the same issue and was ruled a keep.  If the ruling was to change now, it would be seen as a hypocrisy to the earlier ruling.  TravKoolBreeze 00:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep This is the fathest thing from advertising. People who don't subscibe mostlikely want to see what is offered. Hands Down Strong Keep --Mgarnes2 02:39, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - it is an advert, a plain mirror of the company's website. Can you come up with any reliable secondary sources that have reported this list and can you establish notability? CyberAnth 01:38, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * A mirror would not give extra information, such as the list for XM. This extra information such as radio format and note on what has happen to said channels on certain dates are not found on the website at all.  Thus the history given is the notability needed.  Please explain how it is trying to promote the service and telling about subscription prices, since that would be an advert?  Moreover, how is this a TV Guide if it is not telling what shows are coming on at a certain time, which is the reason for the AFD? TravKoolBreeze 02:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If you cannot point to reliable secondary sources who have done what you have done in the article and who have established some kind of special notability than it fails on Original research. CyberAnth 03:29, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * So everything in the world needs to have a credible secondary source to count as research? As noted ealier, the formats and notes on the XM list have been done to show a history of what has happen.  Once again, please explain how it is trying to promote the service and telling about subscription prices, since that would be an advert?  Moreover, how is this a TV Guide if it is not telling what shows are coming on at a certain time, which is the reason for the AFD?TravKoolBreeze 03:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, do you realize how ridiculous the Intro sounds for an encyclopedia?


 * Please be advised that this list is the current SkyCable channel listing. This list is lifted from the SkySked Channel and SkyCable's official website. This channel listing is not applicable to subscribers in the CAMANAVA area and in the provinces.


 * Get you own web-hosting where you can rightly post this kind of stuff if you want to. CyberAnth 03:33, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Please explain how it is trying to promote the service and telling about subscription prices, since that would be an advert? Moreover, how is this a TV Guide if it is not telling what shows are coming on at a certain time, which is the reason for the AFD?  I only speak for the XM list.TravKoolBreeze 03:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That intro was the ost encyclopedic intro I could think of. That was the most informational. And still you think it is not encyclopedic? OK, since your'e asking for it, I'll change the intro. I'll think of a more encylopedic intro than that. (Whaw, I am so angry right now.) PinoiBIGscientian 17:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Strongest keep possible. This is not a TV guide. These are lists of network affiliates. --- RockMFR 04:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * And where are they listed in reliable secondary sources that establish some sort of special notability? One notability criterion shared by nearly all of the subject-specific notability guidelines, as well as What Wikipedia is not, is the criterion that a topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself. CyberAnth 04:55, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If you're asking about television affiliates, I'd say you could review documents from the FCC, Nielson, TV Guide, and who knows what else in in the Television industry. oh, and SEC filings.  Are you trying to argue that an important aspect of a multi-billion dollar industry isn't important?  FrozenPurpleCube 05:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Where are the sources in the articles? CyberAnth 05:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That depends on the article. The articles on the stations themselves apply in many cases, which satisfies me.  If you feel a need, I'm sure you could find a reference list like  so I don't see a problem requiring deletion.  Do you seriously think such information is difficult to source? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FrozenPurpleCube (talk • contribs) 06:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC).
 * Changed to neutral - this is no longer merely a list of channels which I can find in the relevant cable TV guide but rather a list of TV affiliates. Perhaps a retitling and reworking to clarify this would be in order. MER-C 07:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep on all These are reference lists of network affiliates and channels, not a TV Guide. Completely useful (as a contributor to the MNTV and CW articles) and well-sourced. Adding the American networks to this article four days after the beginning of the AfD is something that I really don't like. Nate 08:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep How many times are we going to go through this?! It's like people will keep nominating them until they get their way. --Tv&#39;s emory 20:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * KeepI agree with TV's emory.--XMBRIAN 03:13, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all; this is an encylopedia, not TV/radio listings. &mdash;tregoweth (talk) 21:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above --Caldorwards4 22:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment to both delete above How are these non-encyclopedia works when they would give information?  By using the judgement that you are giving, Category:Lists of radio stations and all lists within should be deleted.  The previous ruling stated that these lists were not a directory, which is the closest to what you are meaning by listings. TravKoolBreeze 22:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep The Other encyclopedias have list of networksMagnum Serpentine 01:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep One of the first things I looked at when I was looking into getting DirecTV subscription was the DirecTV channels article. Very noteworthy and very informative. And to those who say that Wikipedia isn't a TV Guide, TV Guide shows what programs each channel is broadcasting. Listing what channels a satellite company is available to its customers is not a TV guide. For that reason, this AFD should really be deemed void. --Raderick 02:32, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep for bottom four, Weak Keep for the rest. As long as these articles are all kept on a tight leash so no advertising seeps through, then I don't have a problem with this. To me it's notable enough, even thogh I understand that Wikipedia's not a TV guide. -- Wizardman 01:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep People who don't subscribe may want to see what is offered. Hands Down Strong Keep Mgarnes2 02:41, 3 January 2007 (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.