Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom El Fuego


 * 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. Yank sox  01:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Tom El Fuego
Non-notable show. Google search turns up no results for this show or TCUDG. Prod removed without reason by author Wildthing61476 20:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

In response to the nomination for deletion, the Tom El Fuego article has been cleaned up. There is no longer any mention of "TCUDG" in the article. All facts are correct.Tomelfuego 21:04, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - even if the "facts are correct", this homemade show is nonnotable. Selling 1000 DVDs doesn't make it notable. NawlinWiki 21:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I live in Pensylvannia and have seen Tom El Fuego, and have absolutely NO relationship with "Tom Van Cleef" or anyone involved with the show. As the article states, it has a strong cult following. Thediesel 21:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: First and only edit from new editor.


 * Delete Absolute, 100% failure to Verify from Reliable Sources. Fan-1967 21:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Just because it's an independent show doesn't mean it's not credible. There are lots of articles on wikipedia for independent bands and record labels, are you saying we should delete them too?  Also, since the show is independent, it is possible it doesn't have a website to "varify sources," meaning that this wikipedia article might very well be the only easy to find information about Tom El Fuego, giving more reason to keep the article.Jumpinjerseyjim 22:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: First and only edit from new editor.
 * No. In fact entirely the converse is true.  If this article is the only way to find out information about the subject, then it contravenes our Verifiability policy.  Your argument is in fact a very strong argument for the deletion of this article, irrespective that you happen to have prefixed it with the word "keep". Uncle G 09:55, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete No Google results, not listed on IMDB or TV.com...I can't even find evidence that this show exists, much less meets any sort of notability criteria. -Elmer Clark 22:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, unverifiable, no indication of notability. -- Infrogmation 23:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Absolutely no grounds for listing.--Runcorn 19:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - on notability, verifiability and vanity grounds. - David Oberst 21:54, 26 August 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.