Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lost Podcast with Jay and Jack


 * 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. W.marsh 05:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

The Lost Podcast with Jay and Jack
I originally speedily deleted this article as a failure of WP:CSD A7 (article about a person or group of people without an assertion of notability). The author has contacted me to dispute that decision, claiming that this podcast has "been on iTune's Top 100 Podcasts several times, been nominated for several podcasting awards and are subscribed to by thousands of Lost fans". I don't believe any of these specifically satisfy our notability guidelines, but I'd be very interested to hear the opinion of the community. Alphachimp 18:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete A7. 205.141.247.28 18:23, 26 November 2006 (UTC) This was my edit, I didn't realize I wasn't logged in. Otto4711 22:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per WP:WEB; the article fails to assert any notability for the podcast and also fails to mention the URL from which it can be downloaded. (aeropagitica) 20:12, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as there are no sources for notability whatsoever. Jayden54 20:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Yes, I did forget sources. I was making this page late last night and did over look placing a Sources Subtitle.  I do believe that the site should be kept, but will admit there is much room for improvment.  It doesn't meet WP:CSD A7 because it has spent time on iTunes top 100, and I should have mentioned that when i originally created the article.  Since then I have added these necessary items to the site.Ganfon 21:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Ganfon is asserting that the podcast's time in the iTunes Top 100 and PodcastAlley's top 10 establish the notabilirty of the podcast. First, I don't think that being in the iTunes Top 100 establishes notability. There are, or were, issues with the veracity of the iTunes Top 100. I am not of course suggesting that Ganfon or anyone connected with this particular podcast is gaming the list but the fact that the list can be or could have been at some point gamed fuels my belief that the Top 100 doesn't establish notability. But even if it does, the article doesn't satisfy WP:V because it doesn't have any reliable sources establishing its placement. Second, I don't think PodcastAlley's top ten list establishes notability. Even if it did, a review of the October 2006 listings dosn't show this podcast in the top 300 and it's ranked 26th for November. I'm sure this is a perfectly lovely podcast and the hosts are delightful people, but the thing is simply not notable or verifiable and has no place on Wikipedia. Otto4711 22:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. No external sources to back up any claim to notability. Also, any placement in an internet-based popularity rating that changes very quickly is no basis for encyclopedic notability even if sourced. Sandstein 23:21, 26 November 2006 (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.