Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Just Ben

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 of the debate was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just Ben

Appears to be a NN local TV sitcom. Can't find anything relevant on Google. No real assertion of notability other than the claim that it's a "hit". Deprodded by author with explaination "it is a local hit, as it airs on a UHF network, and is only known to some(but is still a hit among those who know it)" given in edit summary. Matt Eason 10:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Delete local TV programmes are not inherantly notable. Ydam 10:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable. Dweller 10:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yo suckas, ER (Operating room deal) gets a show, but Just Ben doesn't? If wikipedia is a site consisting of human knowledge, I believe that even things most deem to be minor deserve a spot in history. This show was a brainchild of mine, and my best friend's four years ago. Now, it's sucessful. It has been in play form, movie form, and now independant television.JustBenCrew 10:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yo sucka, your name is "JustBenCrew", so why should we take you seriously again? Danny Lilithborne 22:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Wikipedia articles must be on subjects that are notable. If you can show that Just Ben is "known outside a narrow interest group or constituency, or should be because of its particular importance or impact", then please let us know. I would also urge you to take a look at WP:AUTO, which deals with writing articles on subjects you're personally involved with. Matt Eason 11:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Google is no help. I had a look at the "fan site", and it's an angelfire page with no content except for a couple of pictures. Actually, this looks and smells like a hoax. However, if the submitter can supply some reliable sources for media coverage of the 'sitcom', then I might change my vote. - Motor (talk) 12:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - reminds me of similar recent hoaxes involving the name "Ben", now you mention it. Dweller 12:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Extraordinary Machine 13:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Author's defence has demonstrated the non-notability of the subject. (aeropagitica) (talk) 15:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - If Wikipedia articles shouldn't apply to a narrow field of people, delete your articles on hardcore, punk rock, hip hop, and everything that applies. This isn't similar to another hoax featuring Ben, this isn't even a hoax. We will have an episode uploaded and linked within a couple days. Maybe that will change your opinions.JustBenCrew2 19:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I don't think seeing an episode will change anyone's opinions. We're not just looking for proof that it exists. We're looking for proof that it exists and is notable, and no-one's been able to provide that yet. Matt Eason 20:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. We are looking for verifiable evidence from reliable sources that Just Ben exists and has some level of notability. That is the benchmark that we apply or should apply to every article. As yet, Just Ben does not meet this benchmark so I am suggesting we delete it. Capitalistroadster 20:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless WP:V & WP:RS can be met for actual media coverage. -- Scientizzle 22:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen this show, it rules - NerdX — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.206.18.92 (talk • contribs)

Don't delete this show, soon it will be relevant. I've heard they're in talks with family channel right now. 70.72.54.155 05:44, 16 June 2006 (UTC) Henry Thomas[reply]

What do you mean you'll "change your vote", Motor? That sign up there says this is NOT a vote. I've seen far more esoteric things kept on this site, and it was stuff no one even cares about. Just Ben is important. Maybe if you keep the wiki up you'll witness just how important it is. I presume this entry alone will generate double the amount of hits, and by logic double the amount of donations. Taking down Just Ben will be like shooting yourself in the face with a PPK; you won't die, but damn will it ever hurt.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.53.72.231 (talk • contribs) .
- The sign up there says it's not a vote... but actually it is. The admin who closes this AFD will tally up the votes and then close it accordingly... they just won't admit to doing it that way. New editors and those without user names are quite likely to be discounted, unless they make convincing arguments involving things like showing where "Just Ben" has some press coverage in reliable sources. - Motor (talk) 08:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please don't make personal attacks. Calling people dumb isn't going to help anyone. Matt Eason 07:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Virtually zero notability. Hardly any reliable references to go by either.--Auger Martel 17:25, 16 June 2006 (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.