Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medienmacher heute


 * 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. There are only two delete !votes, but it's really just an advert and the low number of Ghits doesn't shows any significant coverage.  — fetch ·  comms   03:13, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Medienmacher heute

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This article is a book. The intro (copied from http://www.fritzkohle.de/interviewtext/macher.html) doesn't even state that. This failed WP:COPYVIO CSD because of OTRS. Ok, well I still don't see why the topic is notable, and the WP:COI-written article doesn't make any claims of notability. The links listed are just lists. No third-party coverage with reliable sources explaining why this is a particularly notable book. I believe this is mild WP:ADVERT to gain attention. &mdash; Timneu22 · &#32; talk 10:25, 28 June 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. First part of this article may be a copyvio from here. Not tagging G12 yet because there is a small chance that this site may have copied the text from the WP article. There are quite a few mirrors. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * On what grounds did WP:OTRS say this was "not" WP:Copyvio? --ANowlin: talk 23:28, 11 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom and per WP:NB. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 13:51, 12 July 2010 (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.