Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UnchainedTV

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. I see a consensus to Delete this article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UnchainedTV

[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)

I believe this fails WP:NORG. Aside from the promotional tone, most of the references appear to be press releases. Additionally, the reference from CBS News is just a local TV interview from KMAX-TV which is promotional in nature. The New York Times reference leads nowhere. I think redirecting this article to Jane Velez-Mitchell should be sufficient. Limmidy (talk) 00:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Internet, and Websites. Limmidy (talk) 00:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Limmidy.

I really appreciate that you have taken the time to review this article. I ask that you please reconsider your recommendation "for deletion".

1. I am an avid user of UnchainedTV and am an animal rights activist. Thus, my interest in writing and publishing this article.

2. Your comment that it fails WP.NORG. : Please note that UnchainedTV is a not for profit endeavour and provides all content 100% free and does not even require a subscription, a membership nor signing up, etc.

3. WP.NORG clearly states: "The scope of this guideline covers all groups of people organized together for a purpose with the exception of non-profit educational institutions, religions or sects, and sports teams.". According to their website they are a non-profit education institution: "UnchainedTV is part of the JaneUnChained News Network, a 501 c-3 non-profit, EIN number 82-3892784." Thus it meets the rule of "exception".

4. Well noted on the press releases, the CBS news interview, the NY Times deadline and the recommendation to link to the founder. ---After I hear back from you on the issue of "Article for Deletion", I will then fix all points in #3 above.

Again, I really appreciate your time on this. all my best, 444wiki444 (talk) 00:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that UnchainedTV is a not for profit endeavour and provides all content 100% free and does not even require a subscription, a membership nor signing up, etc is just blatant advertising. WP:NORG applies to all organizations, for-profit or not. The exceptions you've listed are for schools, religions and sports teams. Clearly this streaming website is not a school or any type of "educational institution". And even if was, WP:GNG still applies here. C F A 💬 00:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@444wiki444: Did you use AI to write this article? C F A 💬 01:05, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Both [1] and [2] are unarchived dead links and appear to focus on the "Peeled" show, not the streaming network. [3] is a blog post in an industry publication. [4] is an unarchived dead link. [5] is a trivial mention. NYT is another unarchived dead link. [6] is a republished press release. BroadWay World is an unreliable source. The other sources are republished press releases in industry (possibly non-independent) publications, the press releases themselves, the organization's website, routine coverage, or trivial mentions. Couldn't find anything better. I also don't understand how there are so many (unarchived) dead links when this article was created today? C F A 💬 01:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. C F A 💬 01:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete via A7 (no credible claim of significance) if possible, otherwise delete per NORG and WP:TNT. There's so much possible false information being pushed here that it would be better to remake the article through AfC. Aaron Liu (talk) 01:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Environment, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:53, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Very much PROMO. I had to get to page 14 of a Gnews search before seeing anything that wasn't from UnchainedTV... The CBS link now in the article 404's, so doesn't load. It's here [7], a brief interview on a news program. That's fine I suppose, but if there is no other coverage in 15 pages of searches, there just isn't enough to build an article. Delete for a lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 03:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete blatant WP:PROMO, the sources provided is just WP:SIGCOV failing WP:GNG Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 11:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I would argue for a redirect to Jane Velez-Mitchell#2014–present: UnchainedTV, but the subject's BLP is just as much a mess about the topic. I would not use the KOVR/KMAX source either as that's clearly advertorial placement in the station's morning show of Good Day Sacramento which is not of news value. Nate • (chatter) 16:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I guess the creator poorly created the article, they can retry by removing unwanted stuff.NatalieTT (talk) 15:36, 8 September 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.