Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fadak (TV channel)

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 keep. (non-admin closure) -- Sam Sailor Talk! 13:25, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fadak (TV channel)

Fadak (TV channel) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reason Samaneh-davoudi (talk) 08:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC) More content of the article don't have any sources. A few of them have, but their accuracy is controversial. Because of that the notability of the article is imprecise. According to Wikipedia:Notability, Only being one of the TV channels (or being famous) does not mean that is notable. So it should be deleted.Samaneh-davoudi (talk) 08:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The WP:GNG seems to be covered; even something as simple as a Google News search for Fadak, Fadak channel and Fadak TV reveal coverage across a wide range of sources (Press TV, Middle East Forum, Al Monitor, The Economist, Al Arabiya The Daily Mail, etc.) spanning over multiple unrelated controveries associated with the station such as instances of hate speech, support for terrorism and political conflict in the Mideast. While I am not sure what specific criterion a news organization might fall under, this Fadak station does seem to bear mildly significant, sustained coverage across at least three years and would also seem to satisfy WP:ORG. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:41, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • DeleteAt wikipedia article, We have to be careful that being notable doesn't mean being famous. The Notability must be verifiable and this is proven by the use of reliable sources in articles But there isn't any source at the article that established the notability.If there are reliable sources, why not have been used of them at the article? As far as I know, there isn't any contents that is prohibited at wikipedia.Samaneh-davoudi (talk) 08:16, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I have struck out @Samaneh-davoudi:'s !vote above, as they are the nominator. -- Sam Sing! 10:49, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • DeleteThere are several satellite channel in the world and all of them are not important. Several channel are local and are for specific people or religious. The Fadak is not notable channel and this is for promoting a negative ideas about Muslim and defamation towards religious and historic characters. Also, there is not any source at the article and It seems to writing according to personal idea.Charm4Fasl (talk) 10:27, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sing! 10:50, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You can search the Fadak in wikipedia and you see many pages with this name but only one of them is about Fadak, TV channel. In google search is like this. Fadak is the name of village, Islamic center, shopping, school and so on.Samaneh-davoudi (talk) 08:35, 23 February 2015 (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.