Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NewsCenter

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:26, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NewsCenter

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

This isn't an individual show, but a marking used by a huge variety of completely unrelated news programs, none of which has standalone notability. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 02:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's not like the much more famous, storied "Action News" or "Eyewitness News" formats, which DO have more than a leg to stand on. I can now see why NewsChannel and 24 Hour News Source (an article I created, admittedly) have trouble staying on WP. But at the same time something should be said for the common-ness of the name. Neutral. Raymie (t • c) 05:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is basically a list of television stations which all use, or have used, this generic-sounding name for their newscast. The fact that it's a generic-sounding name which seems to have been adopted by many stations independently from each other leads me to believe that this isn't an encyclopedic topic. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:52, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I can find no documentation in reliable sources discussing "NewsCenter" as a news format. Compare this to Action News and Eyewitness news formats which do get such treatment (e.g. [1]). -- Whpq (talk) 16:33, 17 January 2011 (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.