Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Living Room Candidate


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 14:32, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

The Living Room Candidate

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NWEB. The only review I can find is this which was published just after the launch, suggesting no lasting coverage. de-prodded it but a source search suggests this isn't the case. I wouldn't be averse to redirecting it to American Museum of the Moving Image.  SITH   (talk)   11:35, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 12:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:21, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I wouldn't be averse to merging it either, retaining all of the information. We should then do similarly for each of their major holdings of this sort. It's an extremely important museum and its collections and publciation deserve detailed treatment--though not to the level of individual articles.  DGG ( talk ) 23:16, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep There is coverage of the website in Newspapers.com from 2004, when it was updated 4 years after it was created - eg a Florida paper publishing a story from the NYT, the Detroit Free Press , The Tampa Tribune . There is also coverage in eg the Los Angeles Times , and the NYT published in the St Louis Post-Dispatch , of a video exhibition called 'The Living Room Candidate - A History of Presidential Campaigns on Television 1952-1992' presented by the Museum of the Moving Image in 1992, which was the original version from which the website developed (as noted on its About page, "Special thanks to the University of Oklahoma Political Commercial Archive for providing material for the original version of The Living Room Candidate, presented in 1992 at the Museum of the Moving Image.") So there is certainly enough coverage available to improve the article so that it meets WP:NWEB: "Wikipedia articles should not exist only to describe the nature, appearance or services a website offers, but should also describe the site in an encyclopedic manner, offering detail on a website's achievements, impact or historical significance." I haven't checked scholarly articles or books yet - there may be more there. RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:17, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per RebeccaGreen. Check Google Books - this website is often mentioned among educational sources to explore for politics related issues. I added several citations to the article. --Gprscrippers (talk) 15:59, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   13:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep as appears to have sufficient coverage in reliable sources. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 20:09, 18 January 2019 (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.