- 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. Closed a few hours early per SNOW. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 17:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- SamAndDan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Originally PRODded by me as a non-notable podcast with no sources in article. Nothing in the news or on scholar. — neuro(talk) 15:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong delete. I'm going to err on the side of caution and say there is an assertion of significance, but it's not backed up by independent sources. Additionally, based on the username of the original editor, there is a conflict of interest. —C.Fred (talk) 15:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - What Fred said. A most muscular delete here, I think. X MarX the Spot (talk) 15:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - should have been Speedied. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No, it shouldn't have. We're not here to bite users, and this doesn't fit neatly into a criterion. — neuro(talk) 16:56, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, as non-notable. Tavix (talk) 17:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - If it is only a question of notoriety then the argument is countered - it is successful and it is popular; iTunes listings speak for themselves surely. Danx360 (talk) 18:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- With all due respect, my mate's band is on iTunes, and they are about as notable as I am seventy feet tall. Being on iTunes does not imply notability in any way, shape, or form. — neuro(talk) 18:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. This podcast has existed for only three weeks, and no claim to notability is made in the article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I see nothing to suggest notability, and agree with Fred about the evidence of a conflict of interest from the article's creator. -FaerieInGrey (talk) 19:09, 21 February 2009 (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.