Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sports broadcasting contracts in Serbia


 * 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 procedural keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. This discussion quickly became a WP:TRAINWRECK. No prejudice against immediate renomination (though I'd personally recommend just waiting a week then doing so), whether individual or in smaller bundles. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:27, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Sports broadcasting contracts in Serbia

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

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason below:

Per advice by, I request to pull the exist nomination below and instead, repackage them into a single nomination:

Also for the same reason but they were nominated separately as these were continents rather than countries.

I additionally wish to nominate those for the same reasons as I will mention

WP:NOTGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are varying from being entirely unsourced to being made of primaries and announcments, just not worthy of an encyclopaedic value. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I made a strikethrough as they still have been nominated elsewhere. SpacedFarmer (talk) 10:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports,  and Serbia. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  10:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:NOTTVGUIDE covers this explicitly BrigadierG (talk) 12:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Question Was there a reason why all the articles you nominated have separate noms? Conyo14 (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * From the one nomination about the article for FIFA Club World Cup, it was suggested that they should be nominated separately. I thought it was wise to nominate them separately until I realised that it was because they were about separate sporting events. I have to admit, I'm not too versed with this nominating them together. I'm trying to get into grip with it. SpacedFarmer (talk) 17:21, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It's all good. If you wanted to, you could withdraw the other nominations and have this one be your collection of the nominations. However, you may still proceed if one country features more notability than the others. Conyo14 (talk) 17:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Further comment Per advice by, I wish to close down existing nominations then bundle them together here as well as addions to new nominations here as above rather than nominate them separately. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Your comments aren't clear to me, SpacedFarmer, are you stating you wish to withdraw your nomination? I don't find the way you divided up articles into groups very understandable or helpful and I think they will be confusing to other editors, too. Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I did mention they should proceed with one country if it features more notability than the others. Conyo14 (talk) 23:18, 28 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Procedural keep per WP:TRAINWRECK; way too large of a bundle to be manageable. These deserve to be examined individually or in smaller batches. From a basic Google search that took less than a minute, I found sources addressing the sports broadcasting situation in the US as a group and cohesive topic in accordance with WP:NLIST criteria; that one has a realistic chance of being kept on its own merits. The US and some of the other major countries like Japan, Brazil, India, Canada, should probably be done individually. Left guide (talk) 22:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep. Same reason as Left guide, too many countries to work through the sourcing of. Esolo5002 (talk) 06:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It also should be noted that the Sports Broadcasting Contracts in the United States article has already been through a deletion discussion. Esolo5002 (talk) 19:04, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm offering to remove those that have already originally been nominated as the AfD is still there and pull the newly nominated bun out. SpacedFarmer (talk) 11:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 11:16, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep as above, absolute WP:CLUSTERFUCK of a nomination. GiantSnowman 11:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all Regardless of the so called cluster fuck! I see no need for this type of content on wikipedia and suggest they should all be deleted. Govvy (talk) 11:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: Let's not pile it on against the nominator, shall we? They're new to mass AfDs, and actually nominated these separately before asking them to be combined following a suggestion that may have partly been misunderstood. WP:TRAINWRECK doesn't even actually describe very large nominations, only ones that lead to messy discussions that go nowhere. --Paul_012 (talk) 16:10, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOTTVGUIDE. Renata•3 21:07, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep per above. The   Kip  22:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: This book offers a detailed dedicated chapter of coverage for the sports broadcasting situation in each of eight countries, all of which go far above and beyond the limits imposed by WP:NOTTVGUIDE: 13 pages for Australia (123-135), 12 pages for Brazil (136-147), 13 pages for India (148-160), 11 pages for Italy (161-171), 13 pages for South Africa (172-184), 12 pages for Spain (185-196), 13 pages for the United Kingdom (197-209), and 13 pages for the United States (210-222). Left guide (talk) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep I agree with Snowman. This is a total WP:CLUSTERFUCK of a nomination. I don't even know where to start here. Anwegmann (talk) 23:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Don't see any reason to delete these all. If individual articles have issues with sourcing then tag them for improving and move along. Shadess (talk) 15:27, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philippines, South Korea, Thailand, Vietnam, India, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Poland,  and Sweden.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:47, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia,  and Lithuania.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Portugal, Romania, United Kingdom, Canada, Brazil, Dominican Republic,  and United States of America.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:53, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep These articles help out of country viewers determine streaming options, and as such they serve a reference function worthy of encyclopedic value. Coining (talk) 18:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * WP:ILIKEIT applies. SpacedFarmer (talk) 14:27, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I think that instead of WP:ILIKEIT, you mean to refer to WP:USEFUL, but in any case, WP:USEFUL is inapplicable because the Keep argument lays out the usefulness argument appropriately by saying why the articles are useful. (Quoting WP:USEFUL, "Gesturing to something's usefulness in a vacuum does not help assess its value on an encyclopedia. You need to say why something is useful or useless. This way, other editors can judge whether it's useful and encyclopedic according to Wikipedia's policies. Arguments of something's usefulness, uselessness, or value devoid of further context are not valid or persuasive.") Coining (talk) 15:16, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albania, Kosovo,  and Montenegro.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:57, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Procedural Keep per WP:TRAINWRECK -- Lenticel ( talk ) 23:56, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep for the reasons outlined by Coining and by Shadess. Rillington (talk) 11:23, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
 * WP:ILIKEIT and WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies SpacedFarmer (talk) 14:28, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
 * These lists are not TV guides.Rillington (talk) 01:54, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep on grounds of WP:TRAINWRECK. Some of these may be salvageable with better sources while others aren't, so they would need to each be evaluated on their own merits rather than being analyzed collectively as a group. Bearcat (talk) 17:48, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I also agree with the many respondants who have said that these articles should be considered on an individual basis. Some might struggle but the majority are good articles with lots of independent references and should never be considered for deletion.Rillington (talk) 01:54, 1 April 2024 (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.