Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nostradamus: 2012


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  00:06, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Nostradamus: 2012

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

Unaired programme, Wikipedia is not the TV Times and there is no indication of intrinsic external notability outside the TV schedules Spartaz Humbug! 19:02, 1 January 2009 (UTC) *Keep: Multiple mentions in third party sources, most of which reliable. Much as I'd love to see cruft like this show deleted, and stay off the History channel, I have to vote keep because the show meets WP:Notability. Sources follow:
 * Delete: No notability at all.--Darius (talk) 19:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails WP:NOTABILITY. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 19:36, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.cinemablend.com/television/History-To-Air-New-Nostradamus-Special-14108.html - Near blog, but seems reliable.
 * http://www.gamerstemple.com/NewsPlus/NPViewArticle.asp?cmd=view&articleid=3900 - Looks like just a release, so probably insufficient for notability purposes.
 * http://www.nhpr.org/node/19894 - New Hampsire NPR, all political jokes aside, is a reliable source.
 * http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=2599 - Bloggish, you decide.
 * http://www.christian-journey.com/nostradamus-predicts-the-end-of-the-world-on-december-21st-2012/ - Bloggish, you decide.
 * http://castlefiction.com/heroicdreams/more-on-nostradamus-and-his-predictions-for-2012.html - Blog, you decide.
 * I think the Cinemablend and NPR articles together, discounting the others if they are too close to blog-like content, satisfy WP:Notability. Jo7hs2 (talk) 20:10, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete List_of_programs_broadcast_by_History_(TV_channel) Every show that's on the occult history channel doesn't warrant an article--Wadeperson (talk) 20:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * c: i don't think cinemablend and the npr reference are non-trivial Spartaz Humbug! 20:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * To clarify (double-negative), you are saying that you think those two references are trivial? Jo7hs2 (talk) 21:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete While The History Channel is generally very sophisticated, it also has to air bullshit programs about Nostradamus and UFO sightings and the Bible Code as part of its reach to everyone. The article and the nomination effectively combine to alert us that this will air in a few days, but we're not TV guide.  Nostradamus 2012-- Don't fail to miss it! Mandsford (talk) 21:18, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Change to Delete: After re-reading the NPR article I linked to above, I have to concur with Humbug! that the mention is trivial. It is a mere mention of the time of the show. The Cinemablend article has a little coverage of the show itself, so I would generally consider it non-trivial, but of questionable reliability. Therefore, there is a lack of multiple, reliable, non-trivial sources and therefore the article should be deleted. Jo7hs2 (talk) 21:22, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete: The world will NOT end. If anybody asks me, whoever started this "end of the world" bullshit is a moron. If anybody from the History Channel is reading this, if you are so scared, why don't you just take a rocket and escape from the universe before the "apocalypse" happens?--70.240.215.204 (talk) 23:34, 1 January 2009 (UTC)Chris
 * Generally, you have to register with a user name in order for your opinion to be considered. However, it looks like this is the start of the "end of the article".  Mandsford (talk) 00:52, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete: I'm still the I.P. user. My opinion is on top. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomballguy (talk • contribs) 02:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 00:03, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not the History Channel's marketing department. Shark Week definitely earns their article. History's various attempts to grab ratings with these 'historical specials' usually don't.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 04:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I think Nostradamus wrote a quatrain about this. "a  snowball as the year hundred-score and nine begins, middle of Sagittarius sees no interest in the channel of history" Mandsford (talk) 18:58, 2 January 2009 (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.