Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Joints & New Entries from 106 & Park


 * 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. Lara ❤  Love  04:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

New Joints &amp; New Entries from 106 &amp; Park

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

List of featured music videos on BET's 106 & Park show. The show itself is not based on any kind of sales or airplay data; this seems to go against WP:NOT and just basically is not encyclopedic. Additionally, a similar article listing 106 & Park videos was deleted per AfD several months ago. All of this was in the main 106 & Park article but was removed, only to have an editor copy it and move it to this new page. There is no way to source any of this prior to 2007 (the show started well before then), and as it is a daily show, these tables and the article itself has nowhere to go but huge. Conversation on the main 106 & Park talk page was questioning the inclusion of this info there before I removed it and everything here is a direct copy/paste of the source that is listed at the bottom of the article. - eo (talk) 01:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Just a list of new videos played on the show. Those who add entries to this article should find better ways and topics to contribute to the encyclopedia (or do more for the 106 & Park article itself) than a list of videos that violates WP:NOT.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 04:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete It is a list of information better placed on another website, with perhaps a link from the main page. Tiggerjay (talk) 20:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete unless citations from reliable sources are added to comply with the verifiability policy. Stifle (talk) 20:51, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Regardless of the verifiability of the information in this list, it is in no way notable. — Hello, Control Hello, Tony  21:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The only source is a blog which isn't reliable, so this is fundamentally unverifiable. I also agree this doesn't appear to be notable. Gwernol 22:22, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 23:49, 30 April 2008 (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.