Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Off the subject


 * 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. BJ Talk 05:01, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Off the subject

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

Non-notable local public access TV program. Was originally PROD'ed, but the PROD was removed by the author with no explanation, so here we are at AfD. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:30, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not notable. Does not have any notable third-party mentions, and no participants on the program are notable.  Graymornings (talk) 03:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep But Improve just because it has no notability or isent famous dosent mean its not worth having an article, cause people DO watch it. Does The Game (mind game) have much notability? no, but does it get an article? yes. --Dappl (talk) 05:34, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Please read over WP:N. The game is referenced with reputable, 3rd party sources. Just because people watch something doesn't make it notable. -- Terrillja talk  05:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You're confusing notability with verifiability. Something that is not verifiable might still be notable. You just can't prove it. (That's why we have the WP:GNG). - Mgm|(talk) 15:15, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The Game does have much notability, as it has received a good deal of popular press coverage as an internet meme. And even if it doesn't, that is a discussion for that article.  This article needs to be able to stand on its own notability.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:09, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge Merge with UPTV. This article does not establish notability for a stand alone article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The UPTV article does not have any other information about any particular programs, except for one particularly notable episode of a controversial program. There is not enough notability (or verifiable notability) for this show to merit mention on the UPTV page.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:11, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The UPTV article is two paragraphs long. So discussion of its programming would be a welcome improvement. No? ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Only if such discussion can be properly sourced and notable. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know if it's notable enough for its own article, but it's certainly verifiable.
 * "Slackers working for yuks on Urbana public TV show
 * Author:   FRANK R. PIEPER
 * Date: June 21, 2008
 * Publication: News-Gazette, The (Champaign-Urbana, IL)
 * Page: C-3
 * Document ID: 120080623071442000
 * They're not exactly Monty Python or the Kids in the Hall – although they have a name now (Slackers Selection) – but St. Joseph-Ogden alumni Ben Foutch, Kyle Frederick, Ian Hastings, Alex Schopp, Andy Schopp and Derek Clem do have their own television show, "Off the Subject," airing at midnight Saturdays on Urbana Public Television, Channel 6. Being public access TV, this half-hour sketch comedy program is more in the vein of... Click here for complete article ($2.95)" ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:11, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There has never been any question of the verifiability of this show -- clearly it DOES exist. But one write-up in a local newspaper does not confer notability.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, a non-notable and unremarkable public access television programme. Might be a good watch, but it needs third party sources.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 03:26, 19 December 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.