Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Ray Peacock Podcast


 * 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. Tan     39  17:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The Ray Peacock Podcast

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Unreferenced, orphaned article. Contested prod. Article fails WP:N, zero 3rd party references. Lacks notabilty Should this be deleted or selectively merged to Ray Peacock? Rtphokie (talk) 13:22, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Jamie ☆ S93  17:39, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It's unclear if the nominator made an attempt to find sources. I've added sourcing to non-trivial mentions in The Times and BBC News. I also added a somewhat directory-like listing in Time Out London which at least serves to verify that the podcast production was brought to the Arts Theatre in London. More references need to be added (I honestly suspect they are available). Already, though, I think this is enough to meet WP:N notability guidelines. Keep. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 17:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.   — Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 18:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Selectively merge with List of Ray Peacock. I doubt that the podcast is notable enough to requiere a separate article.  List of The Ray Peacock Podcast Episodes also needs to be pruned or deleted.  Alternatively, delete.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * This podcast has over 10,000 downloads per week during season. I would have thought this would be "notable" enough?  A little confused as to why Peterkingiron has voiced an opinion on this as, from his profile,  it is clearly of no interest to him.  Keep —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.217.68.40 (talk) 04:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. I haven't seen any podcast notable enough for its own article. Alternately, merge into Ray Peacock. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:20, 7 August 2008 (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.