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. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 02:55, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CinemaSins[edit]

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

It is cruft to list every video and tally. Also note the use of unreliable blog sources. wirenote (talk) 21:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article, in its current form, does seem like pure fancruft. I also agree that the current sources are unacceptable for various reasons. I did find this, but it doesn't establish notability. However, I'll wait to see if better sources are presented. CtP (t • c) 22:52, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:54, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While this article has rather poor writing and a dire lack of sources, I would consider it's incomming links establishing notability for it. Zero Serenity ^{(talk - contributions)} 12:35, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's a very notable channel on YouTube, but I would say that it definitely needs more sources. I would also say that the section dealing with the sin videos and their corresponding totals should be kept in a section that you expand, rather than just laying flat on the page. -- Kaitlyn - 6:22, 16 June 2014

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.