Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karma is a witch

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:03, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Karma is a witch[edit]

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

I believe audio podcasts are not something that would be expected to have an article on English Wikipedia unless they meet GNG. This podcast recived some press coverage like this but I am afraid its not enough. Google searches doesn't produce any substantial information about the podcast as well therefore I can't see its significance.. Maybe WP:TOOSOON? Saqib (talk) 18:14, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 18:52, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 00:41, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, there is one good ref but not much else, google showing social media, youtube etc. Notability not established. Szzuk (talk) 18:25, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak*Keep~~Neutral, potentially neutral. "audio podcasts [...] unless they meet GNG" - that doesn't really make any sense, they are just as eligible (or just as not) as other things. In any case, I would argue that both the Indian Express and News9, which while I can't find it in its own right, shows up in multiple places, including in non-youtube duplicate sites. I will do a bit more consideration of News9 later tonight, which will settle me to either Keep/Weak Delete. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:57, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Nosebagbear: Can you please share with me the link to coverage in News9? --Saqib (talk) 16:01, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so I'm not comfortable saying any of the videos I've seen aren't coming from the youtube ones. Assuming no amazing forgeries, they are coming from News9 (Karnataka), set up by TV9 (Kannada) - an English channel in Bangalore, detail on their establishment here. They clearly exist, I can't make guesses on things like bias, they are very far from a smooth established set-up, but that's hardly a sin. It will be a weak source at best, whether it's sufficient to go with the current source to tip it off delete I'm not sure. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:15, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Nosebagbear: I would say the standard set for sources to support claims within an article is a lower standard than that for sources to establish WP:N. My comments are concerned with sources used to establish notability. And I don't think the provided sources meet the criteria for establishing notability. --Saqib (talk) 05:23, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 18:45, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Even with the most optimistic view of the sources, this is not really notability DGG ( talk ) 20:07, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Vote amended to Neutral, pending someone providing a clear answer and evidence regarding News9 Nosebagbear (talk) 08:31, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete--DGG said it all.Sorry but TOOSOON.~ Winged Blades^Godric 15:54, 28 April 2018 (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.