Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Living Foodz


 * 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 CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 08:33, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Living Foodz

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unremarkable Indian television channel, one source mentions its launch, another is about one episode, the other is not independent: fails WP:GNG. Brianhe (talk) 13:28, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    14:13, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    14:13, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:14, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep: I've added 2 more reliable sources. Now the article contains 5 sources. The channel is also notable. Жunal For You  ☎️📝 15:32, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Still doesn't pass the bar for non-triviality. Livemint: "On Thursday, Zee Entertainment announced the launch of Living Foodz, a channel that will focus on food, travel and reality shows. The channel will be available [list of providers]" = routine or in-passing coverage. Business Standard (which you labeled Financial Express for some reason): "Subhash Chandra's Essel Group launched Living Foodz, its first infotainment channel and second channel to focus on the food genre...Living Foodz is part of the Living Entertainment brand of channels" = routine or in-passing coverage. Please refer to WP:GNG: "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention" which is all that has been found so far, even by the person determined to keep this article. Brianhe (talk) 05:37, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:23, 14 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete: I would strongly argue against the notability of this article as it does not satisfy WP:GNG Tyler mongrove (talk) 15:23, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 01:27, 21 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * no significant coverage: redirect to the parent company. anything meaningful from the existing sources can be covered appropriately there. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  08:32, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Onel 5969  TT me 13:17, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. no adequate evidence of notbility. I don't evensee the needfor a redirect.  DGG ( talk ) 04:04, 30 November 2015 (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.