Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Almajd TV 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 keep. (non-admin closure) -- Sam ^Sing! 01:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Almajd TV Network[edit]

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

Ran into it in another Wikipedia language. The sources are not reliable. As a matter of fact, one of them is the website of the TV itself. Kazemita1 (talk) 23:21, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 February 1. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:40, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think it's better to add the {{ref improve}} or {{unreferenced}} tags rather than nominating it for deletion. --ToonLucas22 (talk) 23:50, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I found these two English language sources [1] [2], so it may be notable.- Mr X 03:37, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:03, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam ^Sing! 11:23, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per argumentation by ToonLucas22 and also analysis of additional sources by MrX, above. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 16:41, 18 February 2015 (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.