Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/STV Casino


 * 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.  Sandstein  06:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

STV Casino

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Seems to be mainly promotional material, needs a fundamental rewrite to have a NPOV. Additionally there are no third party reliable sources, and the article is not verifiable. ƒ(Δ)² 13:54, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. Ohiostandard (talk) 06:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete a home shopping network gambling show that watches a roulette wheel for three hours. Miami33139 (talk) 15:48, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Rubbish reasons being listed for deletion. I can see how it can be considered promotional material and does need a rewrite for a NPOV, but the article is very much verifiable and I will add in sources. Not notable and "hope shopping network" is a load of crap. STV is Scotlands biggest commerical broadcaster - and is definitely not a shopping network. I fail to see how a 3 hour long show, even if it is a Roulette show is non notable on Scotlands biggest independent TV network and if this page is deleted I will merely recreate it with proper sources, which is allowed within Wikipedia's own rules. Some 'editors' should actually research the subject before commenting on the AFD's as I think they have just embarassed themselves.--Roadblocker (talk) 20:57, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Remain civil. Your tone and language will not be tolerated. All you've done is added a possibly copyrighted photo, and the names of the presenters. That does not make it notable. While you may fail to see the notability (or rather, the lack of it), it does not mean the rest of us are as blinded. Rest assured, we know enough about the subject to !vote on (or in my case, nominate) the article. If you wish to add sources, do it now. ƒ(Δ)² 18:28, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * What? Tone and langauge? No thanks, looked at much worse on Wikipedia, but I do get your point and I 'apologise'. . Copyrighted photos of TV 'titlecards' are allowed., please see many photos of tv title cards, print screens of website homepaage and product logos. Lack of notability? STV casino has many results, not including Reuters, Digital Spy (One of the UK's top 200 in traffic websites), The Sun, The Daily Mail and much more. Obviously some people do not know what they are doing, STV is not a home shopping network which has already been said earlier. If this page gets deleted I will merely recreate it as this is within Wikipedia's own rules (as long as the page is done correctly the second time) which I am sure you already know. --Roadblocker (talk) 20:06, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * What the above editor is saying is that please do not lose your cool. Your comments appear to mirror WP:OWN. The article was nominated because it is unsure whether the article meets notability. You have said in your above comments that you plan to recreate the article if deleted, but if you can find sources, you should improve the article before the discussion closes. There is at least five days for you to improve the article before a decision is made. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me on my talk page. Thanks.-- LAA Fan sign review 20:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I guess so. I'm sorry 'editors' but it just always seems that articles I edit on always seem to get bumped off this site in some way. I'll appreciate this AFD's decision but I do feel that this is a pretty notable topic and should stay but if the community decides otherwise then who am I to be Head and Ruling Judge. --Roadblocker (talk) 21:16, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MuZemike 20:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. Aside from press releases (which I'm promptly disregarding), the link on the Guardian does not mention STV at all, let alone NetPlay, and neither does the link on the BBC.  Nothing else can be classed as a reliable source, especially the Chat Archive on BBC.  No available reliable sources tells me that there is  no notability - and the press releases are not reliable, as they are primary sources.  Roadblocker, if you have secondary sources, now is the time to bring them up and put them in the article. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 21:36, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree with a bit of this comment but fair enough. Yes some of the sources like the Guardian and the BBC are not directly linked to the show itself - but they prove a little bit that the presenter is indeed notable. There are reliable sources as Digital Spy and The Scotsman etc are notable and they wouldn't make articles on something not really notable. The show in itself should really be notable enough as it is broadcast on STV - Scotlands largest commercial broadcaster but seemingly not. STV Casino is also technically a channel like GMTV meaning it buys airtime and is a network in its own right with minimal hours. I would add in more sources but I don't see the point as it looks like its a landslide for deletion as usual! --Roadblocker (talk) 21:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I hate to say it, but it may not last here. Question, Road, is this a new thing? -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 22:39, 30 September 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.