- 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. I initially relisted, but I saw that the very nomination for deletion argued that there were numerous reliable sources covering the article. As the argument regarding insignificance is not justification for deletion and there were two keep votes, I'll just close this as keep. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 06:09, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Vince and Kath
- Vince and Kath ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Notability issue. This article is too insignificant to deserve a Wikipedia page, even if there has been a number of pretty reliable sources to back up the creation of the content of this article. YX1 ( talk) 05:29, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. B E C K Y S A Y L E S 06:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. B E C K Y S A Y L E S 06:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per nom. Jclemens ( talk) 06:29, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
- Strong keep per nom. Why suggest deletion then give reason it should be kept? Numerous reputable sources and is notable for apparently being the first online series of its kind. — Wylie pedia 17:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 05:57, 23 June 2016 (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. I initially relisted, but I saw that the very nomination for deletion argued that there were numerous reliable sources covering the article. As the argument regarding insignificance is not justification for deletion and there were two keep votes, I'll just close this as keep. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 06:09, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Vince and Kath
- Vince and Kath ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Notability issue. This article is too insignificant to deserve a Wikipedia page, even if there has been a number of pretty reliable sources to back up the creation of the content of this article. YX1 ( talk) 05:29, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. B E C K Y S A Y L E S 06:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. B E C K Y S A Y L E S 06:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per nom. Jclemens ( talk) 06:29, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
- Strong keep per nom. Why suggest deletion then give reason it should be kept? Numerous reputable sources and is notable for apparently being the first online series of its kind. — Wylie pedia 17:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 05:57, 23 June 2016 (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.