Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doctor Who: DWO Whocast

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 no consensus. In the sense that while valid evidence of notability has been proffered and has gone uncontested, we apparently cannot easily check it for validity. A merger discussion or another AFD would be warranted if they turn out to be inadequate. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:34, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who: DWO Whocast[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)

Non-notable podcast. Only sources provided are either primary or otherwise unreliable. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 06:39, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 06:39, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 06:39, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - under WP:WEBCRIT (which covers podcasts), and WP:GNG, the topic must have received "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" - the sci-fi magazine refs are not significant - "Notability" is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance," so the assertion that "it is the most popular Doctor Who Podcast worldwide" does not establish notability - I like the way the article tries to establish notability in the lead with, "This podcast is notable because..." - nice try - Epinoia (talk) 00:21, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as nationally published hard copy magazines are reliable sources despite the willful assertions above, passes WP:GNG Atlantic306 (talk) 21:47, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yunshui ^雲 _水 08:02, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Merge to Doctor Who Online - It is not fair to accuse the nom of being "willful" (whatever is meant by this - would you prefer them to be "will-less"?). However, the fact that we cannot access a source does not mean that it does not substantiate notability. The article includes citations in SciFiNow and SFX (magazine), both of which appear reliable sources for this subject matter. Whilst we cannot examine these over the internet to assess them, we know they exist and, per WP:NEXIST, the article is probably notable unless there are good reasons to believe otherwise. If good reasons to believe otherwise are produced, I say we merge this with the article discussing the website that produces this podcast. FOARP (talk) 09:53, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I'd support this merge. That page describes the podcast as a "regular feature on the website", so a merge seems reasonable. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 16:55, 16 May 2019 (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.