Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Stickly's


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 00:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

The Stickly's

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication of notability. Web search for "Justin Lucas Chambers" results only in this article, and a Wikipedia mirror. Name of show appears to describe a family, but uses possessive, that is, it doesn't appear to be a legitimate professional venture. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Doesn't appear to have won any major awards, etc etc. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:43, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom - No evidence of notability. →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  23:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 29 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Created in GoAnimate and writing that's just asking for the article creator's teacher to unleash their red pen...WP:MADEUP/school web project.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 02:59, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nomination. Not notable. Facebook link on website goes to YouTube which shows preview video has 5 views in the last week. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjQ1OP4wX2A --Jersey92 (talk) 15:50, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:A11. The YouTube channel averages less than 15 views from a month ago and only has one subscriber. I highly doubt the article creator is anyone else but the creator of the show. – 23W (talk &middot; contribs) 22:51, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I would support that. I looked a little closer and came to the same conclusion based on the low hits. I also thought it could be speedy deleted under G11 for unambiguous promotion, since it doesn't even exist yet, and the article seems to be an attempt to legitimize it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:02, 29 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Looks to be non-notable web content.  I guess there's no reason why amateur productions can't attain notability, but this looks very unlikely to draw reviews from Entertainment Weekly. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:15, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not finding coverage in reliable sources. Appears to fail WP:WEBCRIT. NorthAmerica1000 10:08, 31 May 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.