Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swindled

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. Meets SIGCOV and GNG after expansion. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Swindled[edit]

[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)

The show does not pass WP:GNG or WP:NPODCAST. While doing a BEFORE, I'm mostly seeing listicles with short descriptions of the show. I'm fine with using listicles for establishing notability if they actually contain significant coverage, whereas most of these don't even contain 100 words about the show and basically just copied from the show's description on a podcasting platform. The Discover Pods awards aren't bad, but it's not a notable award. Being in the top ten of a category on Apple podcast charts also isn't bad, but the show barely made the list. TipsyElephant (talk) 03:00, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Crime, Entertainment, Politics, Germany, and United States of America. TipsyElephant (talk) 03:00, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: PR items used for sourcing, and appearing in a "10 best" list are about all we have. I can only find mentions of this in lists of true crime podcasts, which don't help notability. The wiki article now is more of an episode list than much of anything about the podcast itself. Oaktree b (talk) 04:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is much press because of the nature of the show but I was able to find short interviews with the anonymous host on websites such as Big Pod, DiscoverPods, and SheReads. I'm not sure that does much for the notability of the show, but the sources are not too different from what is used for the Casefile article (a similar anonymously-hosted podcast) or Sword and Scale. For instance, the iTunesCharts website that is sourced on the Casefile article could also be used to demonstrate Swindled's international notoriety. I agree that the article needs expanding, but disagree with the proposed deletion, as it is a popular and notable podcast. Andy1973b (talk) 22:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded the article to include information about the podcast's TV adaptation and connection to the popular podcast Crime Junkie, which was mentioned in Rolling Stone. I also expanded the reception section to include charting information similar to other podcast articles. Andy1973b (talk) 23:11, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into the sourcing for Sword and Scale and Casefile. Perhaps they should be deleted as well. Regardless they are examples of WP:OTHERSTUFF. The Big Pod and DiscoverPods sources are essentially WP:BLOGS. TipsyElephant (talk) 00:16, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to do a deep dive and improve the article up to an acceptable standard by adding history and production details found in the Tampa Bay Times, BBC News, MEL Magazine, and other direct sources. I'm confident the article can be improved even further with time if it remains. Andy1973b (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Andy1973b, if you intend to !vote keep, you should do so. -- asilvering (talk) 04:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Enough has been added for the subject to meet GNG. Thriley (talk) 04:05, 8 February 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.