Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dear Hank & John (2nd nomination)

Add links
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 merge‎ to Green brothers. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Hank & John

[edit]
AfDs for this article:

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

Dear Hank & John (edit | 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)

Looks to me like WP:GNG just isn't met here. A 2016 AfD resulted in keep based on no credible assertions of GNG-contributing sources. The three that were brought contain no significant discussion of the subject, and as it stands eight years later, there still isn't much media attention on this podcast, and the article's never outgrown largely being based on primary, non-independent sources. If someone finds something I didn't on a WP:BEFORE, awesome, but I don't see it out there. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:32, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Vlogbrothers Green brothers. I agree with the assessment in NOM - Hank Green and John Green, the podcast's hosts, are clearly notable and have extensive secondary coverage. Vlogbrothers has less coverage, but enough to be notable, and seems like the best article to cover collaborations between the two - this podcast is arguably an extension of that channel. BrigadierG (talk) 18:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note, Vlogbrothers is specifically their Youtube channel; I would suggest Green brothers as a merge target. Radagast (talk) 20:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, that would be a better merge target, I was unaware of its existence. BrigadierG (talk) 21:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep because the show passes WP:NPODCAST and WP:GNG. There are sources in Vulture, Erie Reader, Mashable, and Tampa Bay Times. I'm not a huge fan of listicles, however, these are more than a short reprint of the show's description with each article's coverage coming in at about 200 words. I would generally consider that more than a trivial mention. There are a few shorter ones out there in sources like LifeHacker, The Skinny, and The Hindu. Some might consider these enough (i.e. WP:100WORDS). There were also a few articles announcing their partnership with WNYC Studios in Variety, Vulture, and TubeFilter. This article in Audacy, Inc.'s Podsauce is decent coverage, however, I'm not sure what the consensus on the source's reliability is. I would be interested in hearing what others think of Podsauce. WP:NPODCAST mentions that being on a chart is an indicator of notability. On chartable.com, the show is currently No. 7 on the Philosophy category for the United States and No. 3 in Canada. According to itunescharts.net, the show reached No. 2 on Apple's Podcast chart in 2015. TipsyElephant (talk) 21:44, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The four sources here are somewhat more than a short description, but I'm still not honestly sure that you could get a decent-shape article out of these sources. They all seem pretty thin, as capsule reviews tend to be. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 23:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Theleekycauldron: fair enough. What do you think about the reliability of Podsauce? The main thing that jumps out to me is that these reviews don't have bylines, but book reviews on websites like Publishers Weekly don't either and I would generally consider PW reliable for reviews. TipsyElephant (talk) 23:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    no bylines does throw me – I also can't find evidence of an editorial staff, though, and I don't think PW sells books (whereas audacy looks like a podcast platform). theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:22, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did some more searching and I really thought I would find more than I did. I found a 125 word piece in the The Courier-Mail via ProQuest 2108160325. I also found a few different articles in student news such as these: [1], [2], [3], [4] And another announcement about partnering with WNYC Studios: [5] Changing my !vote to a weak support to merge the article into the Green brothers. I'd be willing to perform the merge myself if no one else wants to. TipsyElephant (talk) 03:37, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per BrigadierG JoshuaAuble (talk) 17:46, 30 March 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dear_Hank_%26_John_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1216981564"