Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tell 'Em Steve Dave!


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 17:58, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Tell 'Em Steve Dave!

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This podcast fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines for web content. The objection to the proposed deletion of this article was that the podcast "has a large listener base, is planning a live tour, and features hosts of cult fame". The large listener base is not verified in secondary sources. The live tour suggests possible future notability, but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. The hosts of cult fame are notable themselves, but notability is not inherited. In short, there this podcast has not "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" as per the general notability guideline and should therefore be deleted. Neelix (talk) 14:23, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:34, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I think the iTunes podcast ratings and the fact that both Walter and Bryan both have several IMDB credits for some pretty high profile films, like Clerks shows that this article is entirely valid and should be retained. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.242.58 (talk) 14:01, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Exactly what he said. So Keep. Toontown59153 (talk) 22:22, 5 July 2010 (UTC) — Toontown59153 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Just because you talk into a microphone in your mom's basement and nobody listens to it, doesn't mean that every other podcast is as unsuccessful as yours. These guys rocked 1,000 people live in Brantford, are going on a tour around the country, and have a great listener base that is evident on iTunes and their Twitter account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.251.163.219 (talk) 14:13, 3 July 2010 (UTC) — 74.251.163.219 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

By the very fact that it was voted number one podcast in Australia shows that the podcast has a large following and so should be recognised by Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.43.93 (talk) 22:52, 3 July 2010 (UTC) — 86.128.43.93 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

If you can link to a source about it being voted the number one podcast in Australia that would be helpful. If anyone can link to iTunes podcast ratings that would be helpful too. (I'm not certain where such ratings can be found. As the author of a new podcast on iTunes, I have been led to believe that it's difficult to get such figures, but maybe someone knows something I don't.) As a fan of TESD I'm hoping the wiki page remains, but insulting this guy isn't going to help. Wiki's guidelines are clear. I thing TESD meets those guidelines, but we have to prove it. Agincourtdb (talk) 23:03, 3 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not convinced that it will meet notability guidelines, because I don't know how many reliable sources there are yet. To all of the fans of the podcast coming here to argue, it's not about the quality or the popularity of the podcast, the problem is with how many reliable sources (meaning not message boards or personal blogs) have covered it. And simply being a spin-off of a popular podcast doesn't count either. If the article is deleted now, that isn't to say that it can't be re-created once such sources exist. On the other hand, I did find two sources that MAY help. One is from The Pitch, and the other is from a local newspaper in Brantford, Ontario. and   Rwiggum  (Talk /Contrib ) 00:57, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

http://www.thescene.com.au/Trash/VF/Top-5-Podcasts/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.116.44 (talk) 12:28, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –MuZemike 23:39, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

to try and build a rough consensus from within the community as opposed to as a result of off-wiki canvassing, which looks like is going on above. –MuZemike 23:39, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Good luck with that, smh. By the way, delete per WP:WEB. All the users saying "keep" seem to be SPAs that haven't read WP:ILIKEIT. And if it has a large following, that alone isn't enough to be considered notable on Wikipedia. Erpert (let's talk about it) 06:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete fails notability requirements as discussed. Etrigan (talk) 10:12, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - there are some sources, but at present I don't think they're sufficient for notability. Robofish (talk) 13:54, 7 July 2010 (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.