Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shadow of Israphel


 * 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. SNOW delete, exactly as argued.  DGG ( talk ) 03:13, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Shadow of Israphel

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested proposed deletion. Rationale for deletion was: "Non-notable youtube series. Article is entirely plot, all citations come from Wikia or creators sources themselves. A search for sources gives no results for this series, although the creating group do get a few mentions in PC Gamer - But no mention of this series from what I have looked through."

Prod was contested by User:Moomoohk with rationale: "There is no primary source of information on this show anywhere (as far as i know). Wikipedia is as good a place as any. I would also consider a very notable series with thousands of viewers worldwide"

As no sources have been found/added with the removal of the prod, I am listing this at AfD. In addition to the sourcing problems, the article is also unencyclopedic as it is currently just a big list of plot. I don't think there is anything encyclopedic to document due to the lack of sources. Taelus (talk) 08:09, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Well there is the Yogscast wiki and the videos themselves. I did start to clean up the article a bit and make it less like what you're saying. moomoohk —Preceding undated comment added 11:52, 14 July 2011 (UTC).
 * Another wiki is not a reliable source, nor are the videos themselves. In order to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia, the series must be covered in reliable secondary sources, for example in gaming magazines or websites. At this time this hasn't happened. Check out WP:N for information on our notability policy, and as another user posts below check out WP:PRIMARY for information on why the current citations are not adequate. --Taelus (talk) 11:59, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry then. I just thought they were secondary sources. Side note: There's no need to rip on the Yogscast. To us gamers they make great helpful and informative videos about video games which are quite the opposite of unremarkable. moomoohk —Preceding undated comment added 14:45, 14 July 2011 (UTC).
 * I have nothing against the Yogscast, nor any youtube groups - They just rarely belong in an encyclopedia. As you have linked to a Yogscast wikia already, perhaps you could take these contributions there as that is the place that would have the correct audience. Remember that deletion from Wikipedia doesn't imply anything about the popularity or quality of a group, it just means that they do not meet the criteria to have an encylopedic entry covering them. Regards, --Taelus (talk) 14:53, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That side note was aimed at MikeWazowski. moomoohk —Preceding undated comment added 15:01, 14 July 2011 (UTC).


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  Taelus (talk) 08:14, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - I could not verify information about this series through reliable secondary sources, nor establish how it might be notable. I recommend that Moomoohk enlightens himself by reading WP:PRIMARY. Marasmusine (talk) 09:04, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Yet another attempt by fans of an unremarkable podcast to find a way to promote themselves on Wikipedia. See the deletion logs for The YogPod, The Yogscast, The yogscast, and Yogscast. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:34, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per Marasmusine basically. WP:GNG requires multiple reliable secondary sources with significant coverage and none are given and I cannot find any, including for parent topic Yogscast. —  HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 19:55, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - per MikeWazowski's rationale. Sergecross73   msg me   19:14, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * SNOW Delete Again, no success in finding significant coverage of this show in third party, independent sources. I'm quite tired of seeing articles about this group when they consistently have sources that do not comply with notability standards. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 09:03, 21 July 2011 (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.