- 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 keep. No rationale provided for deletion by the nominator. (non-admin closure) Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 16:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
BBC Choice
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- BBC Choice ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
BBC Three was BBC Choice until 2003 Coddlebean ( talk) 15:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Coddlebean ( talk) 15:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment:
Coddlebean, I don't understand your deletion rationale. Can you explain why we should delete the BBC Choice page?
Toughpigs (
talk) 16:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- tv channel bbc three's original name was bbc choice Coddlebean ( talk) 23:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep. The main problem I have with the article is that all of the sources given are to the BBC. If some decent independent secondary sources can be added then OK. Athel cb ( talk) 19:03, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as a cursory view of Google Scholar shows this appears to have received non-BBC coverage. If a detailed review proves that insufficient and no other independent RS'es are identified, then merge to BBC three. Jclemens ( talk) 22:05, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Procedural keep: The nominator has not provided any rationale for deletion; for all that I understand, it might actually be a request to merge, or even an edit request. This should be closed as keep, with the opportunity to reopen it with a proper deletion rationale. Toughpigs ( talk) 00:46, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep: WP:CSK#1 applies here as there isn't any rationale for deletion. Let'srun ( talk) 14:41, 23 June 2024 (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.
- 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 keep. No rationale provided for deletion by the nominator. (non-admin closure) Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 16:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
BBC Choice
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- BBC Choice ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
BBC Three was BBC Choice until 2003 Coddlebean ( talk) 15:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Coddlebean ( talk) 15:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment:
Coddlebean, I don't understand your deletion rationale. Can you explain why we should delete the BBC Choice page?
Toughpigs (
talk) 16:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- tv channel bbc three's original name was bbc choice Coddlebean ( talk) 23:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep. The main problem I have with the article is that all of the sources given are to the BBC. If some decent independent secondary sources can be added then OK. Athel cb ( talk) 19:03, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as a cursory view of Google Scholar shows this appears to have received non-BBC coverage. If a detailed review proves that insufficient and no other independent RS'es are identified, then merge to BBC three. Jclemens ( talk) 22:05, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Procedural keep: The nominator has not provided any rationale for deletion; for all that I understand, it might actually be a request to merge, or even an edit request. This should be closed as keep, with the opportunity to reopen it with a proper deletion rationale. Toughpigs ( talk) 00:46, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep: WP:CSK#1 applies here as there isn't any rationale for deletion. Let'srun ( talk) 14:41, 23 June 2024 (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.