Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MacBreak


 * 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. v/r - TP 19:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

MacBreak

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Lack of Notable References Softdevusa (talk) 17:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - The article's subject fails to meet WP:N. While the article has only one reference so far, it is incapable of evidencing notability. The first reference is to twit.tv, as primary source, it is not a notable source and it does not evidence notability. Twit.tv has a vested interest in promoting the podcast, it is not evidence of notability. Searching for "MacBreak" on Google Web returns few pages (of 20 results each) do not appear to contain coverage of the broadcast that can indicate notability. Softdevusa (talk) 17:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Guests and hosts on the MacBreak Weekly podcast are reliably and frequently quoted in Wired.com in discussions of up-and-coming Apple products. The show itself is also discussed in an article here, albeit not in an ideal level of detail. --I Jethrobot (talk) 19:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'm surprised a Leo Laporte co-hosted show even got nominated for Afd. Besides Laporte, Macworld considered it one of "Our Favorite New Stuff".  (article preview). --Oakshade (talk) 20:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete There was a second reference added to the article This references was from beatweek.com where there was just one mention of the podcast where a band member is quoted ' like dude, I want to be on your podcast . This is not a notable references Softdevusa (talk) 17:43, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 4 July 2011 (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.