Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Printinghouse.tv

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 -- Cirt (talk) 01:03, 14 September 2010 (UTC) delete. -- Cirt (talk) 01:03, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Printinghouse.tv[edit]

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

An non-notable website. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG and I cannot find any coverage about it. (Contested PROD) Stickee (talk) 23:38, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Article promotes a pay-per-view website with an active PR team. "Chicks and Cannabis." Sounds like Wayne's World Wannabes. Site Stats Notices on Craigslist state the following:

This show contains mature themes and should not be viewed by anyone. But if you do decide to watch please remember that all characters are fictional even those representing themselves. We are live to the world 24/7 streaming from our basement in Vancouver, BC. We party, try to get girls into bed, talk about politics and current events and generally just fuck shit up. Everything is broadcasted live. Come by and sign into the chat or just watch. Cindamuse (talk) 00:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The general requirements for "notability include"

Significant coverage" - the printinghouse site is listed in over 300 separate links and listings on Google.com, it's hosts have been interviewed in major regional and national publications all of which are cited. visitors from over 115 countries have visited the site, and over 6,000 separate visitors per day log on to the site.

"Reliable" -sources are from local, regional and national newspapers who have commented on either the work of the printinghouse.tv cast or crew in the work that their tv show has done for animal rights.

"Sources,"[2] sources are from local, regional and national media, and other experts in teh field

"Independent of the subject" the person submitting this has no personal or financial interest in the subject. I am academic who has done research on the field of social justice, social media and social enterprise.

"Presumed" there is nothing to presume, these really are just facts about the work of those at the reality show.

Thanks!@ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.67.170.77 (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete complete failure to find secondary sources. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:04, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article does not have reliable third party sources. Article is also written like a advertisement. --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 16:08, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I can't find any of the alleged WP:RS that might lead to WP:Notability. Bigger digger (talk) 16:28, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I can't find any reliable sources - no news coverage, no book coverage, no scholarly coverage. All the GHits I found were either wiki mirrors, social networks or blogs. Multiple links on Google does not equate to notability - they have to be at reliable independent sources, which none of these appear to be -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 20:04, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I deleted a nearly-identical version of this article on 8th September (under the name Printing House Television) under G3 - hoax-- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 20:06, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete Non-notable promotional nonsense. sixtynine ^{• spill it •} 23:14, 13 September 2010 (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.