Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/That American Life


 * 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   redirect to This_American_Life. No genuine evidence of notability shown; may be just WP:TOOSOON, hence the redirect Black Kite (talk) 01:05, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

That American Life

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable podcast (at least, so far). I find no substantive independent coverage. The Insider Louisville article isn't independent: it was written by someone who identifies himself as a friend of the person who created the program. —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I have found an independent source, that discusses the podcast and encourages people to listen. Additionally, the show is mentioned as part of another artistic venture by an artist that was showcased in a widely-followed internet newspaper. Joe3guy (talk) 22:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I changed this to show up as a hotlink rather than a reference. The KSR is sort of OK, but the DD source isn't really about the radio show so it's more of a trivial source when you get down to it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Userfy/delete. There has been some coverage, but not enough to show that this fairly new podcast series passes notability guidelines. This is just a little bit WP:TOOSOON for an entry at this point in time. I would say that this could possibly be re-directed to This_American_Life for now as well, as there's just enough coverage to where this might merit a redirect. We just need to wait a bit- hopefully if this keeps on the way it is, we can re-create this later on this year. But for now? Most of the coverage is fairly light. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment The facebook page shows that this Wikipedia article was created due to a promotional request.  Also, one of the references in the article has the words "That American Life" in the title, but the article is about "This American Life".  On the other hand, the use of the word "friend" in the deletion nomination is a misrepresentation of the use of the word in the Insider Louisville article.  Unscintillating (talk) 09:36, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep As per WP:AGF.  Technically the sources in the article are enough to satisfy WP:GNG.  No prejudice to a new AfD in six months.  Unscintillating (talk) 09:36, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, selected among "Best Comedy Podcasts", and also additional secondary source coverage here. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 11:33, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Player.fm is not a notable/reliable source, and Daily Dot has a single brief paragraph about the show. ––Agyle (talk) 10:09, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails to meet GNG. There are three reliable sources with significant coverage cited, and while they provide decent coverage, they aren't strong sources (KSR in particular), and those are all I was able to locate. I understand opinions vary, but this falls far short of the coverage I expect to establish a subject's notability. A request to create the article, mentioned by Unscintillating, doesn't concern me, if the article meets Wikipedia's standards (neutral point of view, cites verifiable reliable sources, etc.), and in the current version of the article those don't seem to be issues. ––Agyle (talk) 10:09, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Podcast generating buzz on sites such as Forbes, The Daily Dot, etc. Has had well-known musicians such as Yoni Wolf and Casiotone for the Painfully Alone contribute and their pages link to the That American Life page.  Page is objective, not promotional, and merely informational. -- 6:55 PM, 26 February 2014   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.204.186.9 (talk) 23:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000(talk) 15:24, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 09:38, 23 February 2014 (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.