Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sports News Highlights


 * 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. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 02:53, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Sports News Highlights

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

Non-notable TV network that just launched; written mostly by one editor who may have WP:COI. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:52, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports,  and United States of America. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:52, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Promotionally written and fails WP:GNG, I did not find additional refs contributing to notability.  VickKiang  (talk)  02:56, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Only non PR coverage is on CBS, which seems to have a piece in this pie. Delete. Oaktree b (talk) 03:28, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:20, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:20, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete At best a small mention of this should be made on NewsNet; this seems merely designed to give 'subchannel farm' stations another place to shove DRTV ads onto and not a network created with the aim of taking its remit seriously, or for a spam-filled website to use the video of to get in adclicks. And no, I'm not picking on this because I'm an ESPN/CBS Sports HQ 'fanboy'; it has no coverage on any station taken seriously in its markets (and CBS has no role in this network; it was meant to be an awkward comparison of CBS Sports HQ's current format).  Nate  • ( chatter ) 04:31, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: A lot of the prose was copied from NewsNet. — Diannaa (talk) 13:05, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete doesn't look to pass WP:GNG. And that's before the possible copyvio issue highlighted above. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:14, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to its parent network NewsNet and add a 1-2 sentence mention at the target page if not already present. Not independently notable as shown by a lack of WP:SIGCOV.  Frank   Anchor  14:54, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to NewsNet and add a brief 1-2 sentence at the target page, as proposed by Frank Anchor. No prejudice against re-creation if the subject eventually draws enough WP:RS coverage to satisfy WP:SIGCOV. Sal2100 (talk) 19:18, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - So a small tv station/broadcast launches on October 31, with almost no coverage and only on tiny low power stations, and on November 1 someone is writing a Wikipedia article about it, with no independent sources at all? Not sure if it's paid editing or very niche fandom, but in any case this is a WP:N failure. Doesn't seem like we need a redirect to NewsNet as they're both just owned by the same company rather than being part of NewsNet (AFAICT). &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 21:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I can assure you it's niche fandom, @Rhododendrites. Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 07:15, 5 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete - Considering it was launched on Oct 31 and was immediately made into an article a day later makes this seem promotional. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:20, 5 November 2022 (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.