From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

List of Premier League overseas broadcasters

List of Premier League overseas broadcasters (  | 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)

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 15:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per sources found by Claudio Fernag. Esolo5002 ( talk) 13:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep GNG is well passed here and the sourcing for this list is certainly not in question, while the article is monitored closely to revert any errors or vandalism near immediately. We disqualify outright press releases, but certainly not reliable news sources, and the nominator is advised that they are perfectly acceptable to source a broadcast partner. Nate ( chatter) 18:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep There are as of now, at least 84 different sources in the article to back up its notability efforts or quota. BornonJune8 ( talk) 9:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, but all but 6 are for articles, the rest are excuses to claim WP:RS. This argument is so 2007. Try harder next time. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 13:38, 8 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete yes there are 84 sources, but not many are actually WP:SIGCOV of Premier League broadcasters, they're just saying "in country X, company Y have a contract for Z years and W money". I don't see any good quality sources e.g. linking overseas broadcasters together in one source (apart from [5], which is one source), which is a suggestion at WP:LISTN for when a list might be notable. This just read like a TV directory. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 15:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep This article is the one on broadcasting rights that has the best and most sources, I see no reason to delete it, it is completely encyclopedic.
PIKACHUNESS ( talk) 18:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Sounds like WP:ILIKEIT. An analysis of the sources would help. Conyo14 ( talk) 19:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here, one editor supporting a Merge but I see no target article mentioned here, just a proposal for a rename. This article has been expanded greatly since its nomination and a review of those newly added sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

List of Premier League overseas broadcasters

List of Premier League overseas broadcasters (  | 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)

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 15:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per sources found by Claudio Fernag. Esolo5002 ( talk) 13:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep GNG is well passed here and the sourcing for this list is certainly not in question, while the article is monitored closely to revert any errors or vandalism near immediately. We disqualify outright press releases, but certainly not reliable news sources, and the nominator is advised that they are perfectly acceptable to source a broadcast partner. Nate ( chatter) 18:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep There are as of now, at least 84 different sources in the article to back up its notability efforts or quota. BornonJune8 ( talk) 9:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, but all but 6 are for articles, the rest are excuses to claim WP:RS. This argument is so 2007. Try harder next time. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 13:38, 8 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete yes there are 84 sources, but not many are actually WP:SIGCOV of Premier League broadcasters, they're just saying "in country X, company Y have a contract for Z years and W money". I don't see any good quality sources e.g. linking overseas broadcasters together in one source (apart from [5], which is one source), which is a suggestion at WP:LISTN for when a list might be notable. This just read like a TV directory. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 15:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep This article is the one on broadcasting rights that has the best and most sources, I see no reason to delete it, it is completely encyclopedic.
PIKACHUNESS ( talk) 18:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Sounds like WP:ILIKEIT. An analysis of the sources would help. Conyo14 ( talk) 19:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here, one editor supporting a Merge but I see no target article mentioned here, just a proposal for a rename. This article has been expanded greatly since its nomination and a review of those newly added sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook