Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Omni Broadcasting Network


 * 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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. (non-admin closure) Maliner (talk) 15:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Omni Broadcasting Network

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Subject does not meet WP:GNG as a defunct television network. Let&#39;srun (talk) 02:38, 1 October 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:35, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United States of America. Let&#39;srun (talk) 02:38, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Some coverage of the company here . I think it'd be a miss for the encyclopedia to having nothing on this topic, so I'll recommend a partial merge of a paragraph or two to KSSY-LP as it was verifiably the sole station owned by this company, and the company is therefore part of that station's history. &mdash;siro&chi;o 05:09, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm the original author of this article, and found significant coverage of the subject in Variety, Bloomberg, and David Blevins' 2006 book on US and Canadian television networks, three sources which are independent of the subject. Additional sources come from the company's own FCC filings and significant newspaper coverage (multiple states). That the company is defunct is of no import: subjects are presumed notable due to media coverage, not whether they are still in operation. Firsfron of Ronchester  05:50, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 10:05, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - I do have their points with the fact there was sufficient information that can be considered reasonable for the article existence. And given that there was some decent information found, despite the fact this network no longer exist, it should be kept. 20chances (talk) 01:49, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - Notable enough to be relevant.
 * TheBritinator (talk) 11:46, 23 October 2023 (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.