682:). A program doesn't become notable by being listed on a large station - for much the same reason a word isn't necessarily significant for being in a large dictionary. "Big channel" or "big TV company" doesn't necessarily mean the programs listed on it gained notice from the wider world, and that's the issue notability is looking at. We're trying to assess the quality and extent of attention it got in reliable sources
554:
you that if you are trying to save this article, you are going about it the wrong way. People have previously turned AfDs around by making a good case for notability which persuades other people to change their mind. But when the defence is simply claiming you're not allowed to nominate the article for deletion, that tactic (along with abuse and arbitrary claims of grandeur) usually stops most people listening.
627:
Really? I don't know how more notable a programming schedule from a website owned by the on of, if not THE largest Non-Sky owned satellite company in Europe I can possibly get then. It airs on ThatGuyWithTheGlasses too, a site that was voted on for an AfD itself, but deemed notable enough to keep.
690:
the wider world to take notice - a big difference. Look for evidence it got significant coverage (in the sense of atention, not market size) in other credible published sources that are independent of its makers and broadcasters, or awards, or special mentions, or the like, that's much more the kind
568:
I understand, would information from
Information TV's website suffice as notability? (as the show airs on several of their channels on Sky/freeview now. I believe press releases exist on GamesPress.com and also many articvles on places like ThatGurWithTheGlasses.com, ScrewAttack.com, Retroware TV
553:
Loopholes avoid rules, and I don't understand which rule you think the nominator is avoiding. The only rule you seem to think has been evaded is a rule against nominating the same article for deletion twice, and as I and others have pointed out, that is considered perfectly legitimate. I should warn
720:
Thanks for your help (also for the article) I'll have a look around, see what I can come up with. I'd have liked to have put it up as notable for being the world's first full Retro gaming TV show, but I'm going to have great difficulty proving as there's no "first" lists Etc.
645:
is your answer. Just because X is closely associated with notable Y doesn't mean X is notable in its own right. Note that none of the individual TGWTG personalities has a page here, because none of them has sufficient standalone notability. Not even the
Nostalgia Critic.
524:
Why not? The previous discussion was closed with the observation that this article was being discussed. Now we're discussing it. Why should we have to wait an arbitrary amount of time to discuss the notability of an article we didn't properly discuss last time?
174:
471:
The article here is much better founded. The series lasted, there are cites in the article, there is a visible reason why it might be notable. There is almost no discussion at this AFD either to show any consensus to delete.
495:
You missed the phrase "without prejudice to future discussion". This is the future discussion, and this article will stay or go depending on the outcome of this discussion. Previous AfDs never tie the hands of future AfDs.
663:
Had one for well over a year and Spoony's has merged to be more about himself, as with Doug Walker. But my first comment about considering one of the largest
Satelitte broadcasters in Europe to be noteable still stands.
439:
I thought this was to be kept? there are several notable links in there, from press releases from GamesPress.com amongst others. Not to mention the show is still on Sky TV, Freesat and
Freeview airing on
205:
Host's article was deleted for lack of notability; and I'm not seeing any individual notability for the show. This was bundled into the host's AFD, but kept as no-consensus due to no one addressing the
279:: Just a segment in another show (excluding, from what I understand, the 15 min highlights programme). No evidence of notability. If we delete this, can I ask that we employ common sense and delete
130:
230:
168:
680:"I don't know how more notable a programming schedule from a website owned by the on of, if not THE largest Non-Sky owned satellite company in Europe I can possibly get then"
255:
477:
103:
98:
107:
90:
686:. Its hosting company or broadcaster is not independent, and their mentions of it are not because the wider world took notice but because they
651:
618:
395:
300:
219:
215:
189:
372:
some of the information not already in the main article. Can't see any evidence of notability independent of the show it spun off from.
156:
17:
281:
150:
730:
699:
673:
655:
637:
622:
592:
578:
563:
548:
534:
519:
505:
489:
453:
425:
399:
381:
356:
323:
269:
244:
72:
510:
So the same person can put up an AfD the day after? (like what has happened here) That hardly seems a reasonable action.--
559:
530:
501:
421:
377:
146:
751:
36:
94:
726:
669:
633:
588:
574:
544:
515:
485:
449:
319:
196:
135:
642:
750:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
555:
526:
497:
417:
373:
86:
78:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
162:
722:
665:
629:
584:
570:
540:
511:
481:
445:
315:
469:"Guru Larry's Retro Corner - No consensus - default to keep without prejudice to any future discussion.
293:
660:
613:
All the sources added by
Firecracker were primary sources. Still doesn't cut it for notability IMO.
441:
311:
182:
583:
I have added several refrences to TV networks it currently airs on, as well as several websites.--
409:
365:
337:
doesn't even assert notability aside from the totally uncited "popular" in the first sentence.
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
263:
238:
65:
692:
286:
338:
539:
It just seems like a loophole for someone with a personal vendetta to abuse Etc.--
124:
49:
696:
462:
691:
of question that helps. You might find the guidance in the introduction
744:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
488:) So why are you asking to have this deleted again Hammer?
569:
as well. Also uploaded videos on YouTube of episodes.--
120:
116:
112:
181:
695:
helpful (including the text in the "collapse box").
478:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Larry Bundy Jr
231:
list of United
Kingdom-related deletion discussions
195:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
754:). No further edits should be made to this page.
476:This article was defaulted to keep as noted in
256:list of Television-related deletion discussions
8:
310:Incorrect, it is currently a full show on
282:List of Guru Larry's Retro Corner episodes
250:
225:
254:: This debate has been included in the
229:: This debate has been included in the
314:Airing on Sky, Freeview and Freesat. --
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
678:To clarify on a comment above (
210:notability in the host's afd.
1:
731:21:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
700:15:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
674:04:36, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
656:04:01, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
638:02:39, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
623:19:31, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
593:06:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
579:23:49, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
564:19:23, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
549:19:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
535:18:12, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
520:08:55, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
506:08:34, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
490:05:58, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
454:05:48, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
426:22:18, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
400:22:14, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
382:20:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
357:19:01, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
324:05:55, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
301:17:12, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
270:17:04, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
245:17:03, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
220:16:51, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
73:05:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
77:
771:
461:Also to quote Wiki Admin,
390:The Chart is also at AFD.
87:Guru Larry's Retro Corner
79:Guru Larry's Retro Corner
747:Please do not modify it.
684:independent of the topic
32:Please do not modify it.
67:Questions or Comments?
556:Chris Neville-Smith
527:Chris Neville-Smith
498:Chris Neville-Smith
418:Chris Neville-Smith
374:Chris Neville-Smith
654:and a clue-bat •
621:and a clue-bat •
408:Okay, redirect if
398:and a clue-bat •
285:with it. Thanks. —
218:and a clue-bat •
44:The result was
272:
259:
247:
234:
71:
762:
749:
723:FirecrackerDemon
666:FirecrackerDemon
649:
648:Ten Pound Hammer
630:FirecrackerDemon
616:
615:Ten Pound Hammer
585:FirecrackerDemon
571:FirecrackerDemon
541:FirecrackerDemon
512:FirecrackerDemon
482:FirecrackerDemon
446:FirecrackerDemon
393:
392:Ten Pound Hammer
354:
351:
348:
345:
316:FirecrackerDemon
298:
291:
266:
260:
241:
235:
213:
212:Ten Pound Hammer
200:
199:
185:
138:
128:
110:
68:
63:
61:
58:
55:
52:
34:
770:
769:
765:
764:
763:
761:
760:
759:
758:
752:deletion review
745:
647:
643:WP:NOTINHERITED
614:
416:if it doesn't.
391:
368:and optionally
352:
349:
346:
343:
294:
287:
264:
239:
211:
142:
134:
101:
85:
82:
66:
59:
56:
53:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
768:
766:
757:
756:
741:
740:
739:
738:
737:
736:
735:
734:
733:
709:
708:
707:
706:
705:
704:
703:
702:
661:Larry Bundy Jr
625:
610:
609:
608:
607:
606:
605:
604:
603:
602:
601:
600:
599:
598:
597:
596:
595:
470:
457:
456:
442:Information TV
433:
432:
431:
430:
429:
428:
403:
402:
385:
384:
359:
339:Andrew Lenahan
331:
330:
329:
328:
327:
326:
312:Information TV
274:
273:
248:
203:
202:
139:
136:Afd statistics
81:
76:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
767:
755:
753:
748:
742:
732:
728:
724:
719:
718:
717:
716:
715:
714:
713:
712:
711:
710:
701:
698:
694:
689:
685:
681:
677:
676:
675:
671:
667:
662:
659:
658:
657:
653:
644:
641:
640:
639:
635:
631:
628:So Ergo... --
626:
624:
620:
612:
611:
594:
590:
586:
582:
581:
580:
576:
572:
567:
566:
565:
561:
557:
552:
551:
550:
546:
542:
538:
537:
536:
532:
528:
523:
522:
521:
517:
513:
509:
508:
507:
503:
499:
494:
493:
492:
491:
487:
483:
479:
474:
473:
466:
464:
459:
458:
455:
451:
447:
443:
438:
435:
434:
427:
423:
419:
415:
411:
407:
406:
405:
404:
401:
397:
389:
388:
387:
386:
383:
379:
375:
371:
367:
363:
360:
358:
355:
340:
336:
333:
332:
325:
321:
317:
313:
309:
308:
307:
306:
305:
304:
303:
302:
299:
297:
292:
290:
284:
283:
278:
271:
268:
267:
257:
253:
249:
246:
243:
242:
232:
228:
224:
223:
222:
221:
217:
209:
198:
194:
191:
188:
184:
180:
176:
173:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
148:
145:
144:Find sources:
140:
137:
132:
126:
122:
118:
114:
109:
105:
100:
96:
92:
88:
84:
83:
80:
75:
74:
69:
62:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
746:
743:
687:
683:
679:
475:
468:
467:
460:
436:
413:
369:
361:
342:
334:
295:
288:
280:
276:
275:
262:
251:
237:
226:
207:
204:
192:
186:
178:
171:
165:
159:
153:
143:
45:
43:
31:
28:
437:Strong Keep
265:Jujutacular
240:Jujutacular
169:free images
652:his otters
619:his otters
412:survives,
396:his otters
216:his otters
410:The Chart
366:The Chart
463:User:FT2
364:back to
362:Redirect
131:View log
175:WP refs
163:scholar
104:protect
99:history
414:delete
335:Delete
277:Delete
147:Google
108:delete
46:delete
370:merge
296:Price
190:JSTOR
151:books
133:) •
125:views
117:watch
113:links
16:<
727:talk
693:here
688:want
670:talk
634:talk
589:talk
575:talk
560:talk
545:talk
531:talk
516:talk
502:talk
486:talk
450:talk
422:talk
378:talk
320:talk
289:Half
252:Note
227:Note
208:show
183:FENS
157:news
121:logs
95:talk
91:edit
697:FT2
465:...
350:bli
261:--
236:--
197:TWL
129:– (
729:)
721:--
672:)
664:--
650:,
636:)
617:,
591:)
577:)
562:)
547:)
533:)
518:)
504:)
480:--
452:)
444:--
424:)
394:,
380:)
353:nd
347:ar
344:St
341:-
322:)
258:.
233:.
214:,
177:)
123:|
119:|
115:|
111:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
60:ik
51:Sh
48:.
725:(
668:(
632:(
587:(
573:(
558:(
543:(
529:(
514:(
500:(
484:(
472:"
448:(
420:(
376:(
318:(
201:)
193:·
187:·
179:·
172:·
166:·
160:·
154:·
149:(
141:(
127:)
89:(
70:)
64:(
57:r
54:i
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.