Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turkish News Network


 * 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 per consensus --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 11:00, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Turkish News Network

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fictional news network in video games, not notable but technically not a hoax. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  17:08, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Not sure how to post comments properly here but I agree, it's not a hoax and is similar to other more notable fictional brands. Siberix IX  17:17, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   17:28, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 17:29, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 17:29, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete non notable fictional newschannel. The only references are WP:PRIMARY consisting of a YouTube video, a twitter account, and an online forum. Justeditingtoday (talk) 17:40, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

--Mentioned issues have either been addressed or do not apply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siberix (talk • contribs) 22:05, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * How so, ? CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  23:08, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

-- the YouTube video is related, the twitter account is official and there is no online forum


 * Please read WP:PRIMARY and WP:OR. I didn't say the video wasn't related. There certainly is an online forum. It is this reference which is an online group with a message wall. Justeditingtoday (talk) 00:37, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

--that's not a forum — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siberix (talk • contribs) 04:48, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Whatever it is, its not a third party reliable source written by a professional journalist or writer, which is what a subject needs to have its own Wikipedia article. Unless you can find sources like that (See WP:VG/S for some common examples) the article is going to be deleted. And even if you find sources, you're probably also going to have to come up with a reason for why we need an extremely short stub of an article on a fictional news network from a video game. If you haven't noticed, that's not the type of thing that typically has its own separate article. It sounds more like something that would be a couple sentences in the Roblox article at best. Sergecross73   msg me  15:49, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

-- the roblox article is too general for such an article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siberix (talk • contribs) 21:19, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, well then you're looking at "delete" as your only option then, unless some better sources are found. There's no chance it'll be kept with the current sources - they're not even borderline acceptable currently. Sergecross73   msg me  23:04, 8 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - non-notable, in-universe, fictional content for the Roblox video games. Absolutely no need for a stand-alone article. Sergecross73   msg me  18:54, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete by throwing this article into the sun. Wikipedia is not a place to complain about some sort of anti-Roblox media campaign, nor is it a place to promote a non-notable in-universe user generated news channel. The article creator should read through the General Notability Guideline and WP:RS before they consider creating another article. Exemplo347 (talk) 22:08, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete blatantly promotional in nature, and not at all notable. Power~enwiki (talk) 01:35, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is another WP:SNOW-case: it clearly lacks reliable sourcing and isn't notable in the slightest. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 10:05, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per above commentary. Aoba47 (talk) 19:40, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Subject just isn't notable nor is it covered in any independent reliable sources. Meatsgains (talk) 00:43, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Article lacks reliable third party sources to establish notability. TheDeviantPro (talk) 07:38, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: No evidence of notability. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:27, 14 May 2017 (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.