Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Potterless

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:50, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Potterless

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Podcast that fails WP:GNG. This article has served as little more than a mixture of web-boosting (there are several SPA accounts that have added promotional content) and a listener fan page. GPL93 (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. GPL93 (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. GPL93 (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. GPL93 (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The article doesn't indicate that the podcast has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources and I haven't been able to find significant coverage elsewhere. There's a certain amount of coverage in student newspapers, but those almost always lack the "reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" we require of a reliable source. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:05, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article looks like WP:FANCRUFT, it needs to be trimmed down by removing unnecessary information. Primary sources should be removed. Other than that, the article is good enough to be kept. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 04:51, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- BTW, if you're thinking of arguing with me over my vote, don't bother responding. I'm not looking for an argument in this AfD since it won't change anything, especially my views. So, I won't reply at all. My vote stands no matter what. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 04:57, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Regardless of response, I'd like to clarify that paring down the fancruft would still leave the issue that the only coverage by a reliable source is a short review in a local newspaper. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:58, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I've been unable to find additional sources to add to those in the article currently, and those are insufficient to support notability. Just a blog, a few school newspapers, a Rowling site, and the podcaster's school doing alumni mentions. Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NCREATIVE. Schazjmd (talk) 15:15, 24 March 2020 (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.