397:
The first source is quite biased. Not sure about it's reliability, but it could be used for a "criticism" bit. Second was what I was talking about. Third is better, could get a pass (though I don't think the
Infographics Show is a kids' series). Fourth, fifth, and seventh are trivial mentions. Sixth
426:"Why havn't you improved the article now?" is not an appropriate reply in an AFD. The user does not need to take time out of their day to do anything but prove that there are sources in an AFD if they support "keep", they're not obligated to fix the article right away.
213:
498:. There are also several articles I saw which mention the series as a reliable and good YT channel while not being specifically about the channel. I think a reception section can be built on that.
207:
588:
BTW, don't bother responding. I'm not interested in looking for an argument or debate in this AfD. I've said what I have said. So, I won't reply any further. My vote stands.
485:
291:
440:
I apologize for my reply. I wasn't to be uncivil. I was suggesting that if there were reliable sources, they should be put in the article to prove the subject is notable.
322:
166:
520:, and the third source leans closer towards a trivial mention. When there are not much articles significantly covering a subject, the notability becomes more disputed.
621:: Apparently, I didn't search well enough, in which the Google News search brings up several articles bringing up the Infographics Show (I'm kinda embarrassed).
628:
98:
113:
173:
360:. Note many articles may be on the subject of one of the shows but do talk about the Infographics Show at length as well, which means the sources pass
259:
A Google search for the
Infographics show doesn't bring up anything meaningful besides the show's online profiles and articles talking about unrelated
139:
134:
143:
654:
535:
455:
416:
340:
309:
278:
252:. However, the cited article is just a short trivial summary of the Inforaphics Show and the video shown in the article, which doesn't meet the
126:
477:
625:
367:
245:
553:
93:
86:
17:
228:
622:
195:
602:
576:
384:
371:
373:
369:
401:
I'll wait for other people to comment on this. If you have sources you think are reliable, why not add them to the article?
107:
103:
55:
495:
634:
398:
is on a site which does articles on "How much money does (insert popular YouTuber) make", doubt that would be meaningful.
253:
676:
189:
40:
650:
531:
451:
412:
380:
336:
305:
274:
659:
609:
583:
540:
507:
460:
435:
421:
388:
345:
314:
283:
68:
185:
556:
365:
130:
235:
375:
377:
122:
74:
640:
521:
441:
402:
326:
295:
264:
64:
672:
36:
598:
572:
476:
Its narrow, but I'm going with week keep. Besides the sources found by the above user there is also
249:
221:
201:
361:
503:
431:
82:
60:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
671:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
637:
631:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
490:
559:
517:
357:
590:
564:
639:. While most aren't detailed in the mentions, maybe this could push for a weak article.
481:
499:
427:
260:
558:. These, including the ones indicated above, make the article good enough to pass
516:
The first source looks like a trivial promotion, the second source is most likely
160:
552:: I also found a few reliable sources which talk about the show:
667:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
156:
152:
148:
220:
248:, whose author is be an expert according to his bio,
234:
244:Only non-primary source cited in the article is a
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
679:). No further edits should be made to this page.
321:Note: This discussion has been included in the
290:Note: This discussion has been included in the
292:list of Education-related deletion discussions
323:list of Internet-related deletion discussions
8:
114:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
320:
289:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
254:notability guideline for web content
24:
250:making the source reliable itself
99:Introduction to deletion process
1:
89:(AfD)? Read these primers!
696:
246:Forbes contributor article
669:Please do not modify it.
660:19:11, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
610:03:09, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
584:03:09, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
541:02:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
508:21:00, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
461:02:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
436:20:35, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
422:23:35, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
389:22:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
346:17:33, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
315:17:33, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
284:17:33, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
69:10:52, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
381:AlessandroTiandelli333
123:The Infographics Show
87:Articles for deletion
75:The Infographics Show
658:
644:PrincessPandaWiki
539:
525:PrincessPandaWiki
459:
445:PrincessPandaWiki
420:
406:PrincessPandaWiki
348:
344:
330:PrincessPandaWiki
317:
313:
299:PrincessPandaWiki
282:
268:PrincessPandaWiki
104:Guide to deletion
94:How to contribute
59:
56:non-admin closure
687:
648:
646:
608:
606:
593:
582:
580:
567:
529:
527:
449:
447:
410:
408:
334:
332:
303:
301:
272:
270:
239:
238:
224:
176:
164:
146:
84:
53:
48:The result was
34:
695:
694:
690:
689:
688:
686:
685:
684:
683:
677:deletion review
641:
607:
596:
591:
589:
581:
570:
565:
563:
522:
442:
403:
327:
296:
265:
181:
172:
137:
121:
118:
81:
78:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
693:
691:
682:
681:
663:
662:
615:
614:
613:
612:
595:
569:
546:
545:
544:
543:
518:user-generated
511:
510:
470:
469:
468:
467:
466:
465:
464:
463:
399:
392:
391:
350:
349:
318:
242:
241:
178:
117:
116:
111:
101:
96:
79:
77:
72:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
692:
680:
678:
674:
670:
665:
664:
661:
656:
652:
647:
645:
638:
635:
632:
629:
626:
623:
620:
617:
616:
611:
604:
600:
594:
587:
586:
585:
578:
574:
568:
561:
557:
554:
551:
548:
547:
542:
537:
533:
528:
526:
519:
515:
514:
513:
512:
509:
505:
501:
497:
493:
492:
487:
483:
482:Dread Central
479:
475:
472:
471:
462:
457:
453:
448:
446:
439:
438:
437:
433:
429:
425:
424:
423:
418:
414:
409:
407:
400:
396:
395:
394:
393:
390:
386:
382:
378:
376:
374:
372:
370:
368:
366:
363:
359:
355:
352:
351:
347:
342:
338:
333:
331:
324:
319:
316:
311:
307:
302:
300:
293:
288:
287:
286:
285:
280:
276:
271:
269:
262:
257:
255:
251:
247:
237:
233:
230:
227:
223:
219:
215:
212:
209:
206:
203:
200:
197:
194:
191:
187:
184:
183:Find sources:
179:
175:
171:
168:
162:
158:
154:
150:
145:
141:
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
119:
115:
112:
109:
105:
102:
100:
97:
95:
92:
91:
90:
88:
83:
76:
73:
71:
70:
66:
62:
57:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
668:
666:
643:
618:
549:
524:
489:
473:
444:
405:
353:
329:
298:
267:
263:themselves.
261:infographics
258:
243:
231:
225:
217:
210:
204:
198:
192:
182:
169:
80:
61:Juliette Han
49:
47:
31:
28:
208:free images
673:talk page
362:WP:SIGCOV
37:talk page
675:or in a
655:contribs
603:ICE CUBE
577:ICE CUBE
536:contribs
500:★Trekker
456:contribs
428:★Trekker
417:contribs
341:contribs
310:contribs
279:contribs
167:View log
108:glossary
39:or in a
619:Comment
592:ASTIG😎
566:ASTIG😎
356:Passes
214:WP refs
202:scholar
140:protect
135:history
85:New to
560:WP:GNG
491:Medium
358:WP:GNG
186:Google
144:delete
599:ICE T
573:ICE T
488:from
480:from
229:JSTOR
190:books
174:Stats
161:views
153:watch
149:links
16:<
651:talk
555:and
550:Keep
532:talk
504:talk
496:this
494:and
486:this
478:this
474:Keep
452:talk
432:talk
413:talk
385:talk
354:Keep
337:talk
306:talk
275:talk
222:FENS
196:news
157:logs
131:talk
127:edit
65:talk
50:keep
236:TWL
165:– (
653:|
642:❤︎
636:,
633:,
630:,
627:,
624:,
601:•
575:•
562:.
534:|
523:❤︎
506:)
484:,
454:|
443:❤︎
434:)
415:|
404:❤︎
387:)
379:.
364:.
339:|
328:❤︎
325:.
308:|
297:❤︎
294:.
277:|
266:❤︎
256:.
216:)
159:|
155:|
151:|
147:|
142:|
138:|
133:|
129:|
67:)
52:.
657:)
649:(
605:)
597:(
579:)
571:(
538:)
530:(
502:(
458:)
450:(
430:(
419:)
411:(
383:(
343:)
335:(
312:)
304:(
281:)
273:(
240:)
232:·
226:·
218:·
211:·
205:·
199:·
193:·
188:(
180:(
177:)
170:·
163:)
125:(
110:)
106:(
63:(
58:)
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.