Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OneWorldTV


 * 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. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:21, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

OneWorldTV

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:GNG. Störm  (talk)  17:54, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:12, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:12, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:19, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:20, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment: This article was mentioned in a related AfD in 2008. AllyD (talk) 14:13, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:48, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge Fails notability in its own right. Merge anything appropriate to Peter William Armstrong and Delete this article.  HighKing++ 15:55, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: Probably a worthy initiative in its time, but the two given references are effectively start-up coverage from 2002. There are also several sources from that decade mentioning the service, but I am not seeing better than listings, and I don't think the two 2002 items are really enough to demonstrate attained notability. Had the Oneworld.net article not been deleted in a 2008 AfD, it could have served as a redirect target, but without that the brief mention in the Peter William Armstrong article is probably sufficient. AllyD (talk) 19:20, 9 December 2019 (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.