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 no consensus. T. Canens (talk) 02:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Nine Network slogans[edit]

List of Nine Network slogans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Trivial fan-cruft. Not a single section is referenced, none of it is notable, none of it is verifiable, all of it original research. Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC) 23:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as Wikipedia is not a directory. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 00:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• A lot of hard work has gone into this list of slogans. Please do not delete this article. Eddie Blake 14:20PM (AEST)
  • Comment - Perhaps you can start a page elsewhere on the web for this info (wikia.com?). It just doesn't appear to meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia.--SharkxFanSJ (talk) 01:52, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOTDIR.--SharkxFanSJ (talk) 01:52, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Please, in time for YOG 2010, in which 9 is the principal broadcaster, don't delete this, and also for the 55th anniversary of Aussie TV next year. JMRAMOS0109 (talk) 6:43 P.M., 13 July 2010 (PST)
  • Comment See: WP:MERCY. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 19:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Canley (talk) 07:05, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Please, in time for YOG 2010, in which the Nine Network and GO!!! are the principal broadcasters, don't delete this, and also for the 55th anniversary of Aussie TV next year. I did everything to contribute to this page. JMRAMOS0109 (talk) 6:45 P.M., 13 July 2010 (PST) Striking as user has already voted above. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:15, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The same comment applies to the List of Network Ten slogans which is also up for WP:AfD. To a degree this is WP:POPCULTURE. This type of content is what distinguishes Wikipedia from more traditional encyclopedias and there is general consensus (I believe) to encourage this type of content. The slogans are verifiable and factual - and of genuine interest (to some). Look at the Internet archive for the nine network. Finding refs and citations for these slogans is going to take work but that can be fixed so WP:SOFIXIT. Some of the newer slogans such as "Welcome Home" are clearly verifiable. WP:GNG states If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article. Notability is verified by non-trivial mentions in secondary sources. I think that this is a keep and should be encouraged. AWHS (talk) 12:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The main problem with this article is, that it is just a simple list of slogens and there's no other meaningful content. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 14:26, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Popular Culture states that "Popular culture is often viewed as being trivial"... AWHS (talk) 10:40, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. — AWHS (talk) 11:08, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I'm sure these are as notable as the American network slogans, but sources will be even harder to find because Australian reliable sources (especially older ones) do not have as much of a web presence as American sources. DHowell (talk) 06:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you can find these sources, then source them....all of them. Otherwise, they aren't verfiable or reference and are a page of fan cruft made by a sockpuppet. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:26, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It's about time a nomination was made for this. In the years this article has been up, not one source has been presented into the article itself and it is just an unsourced list that has expanded to both unsourced local slogans (which often were just pushed out by a station in twenty seconds by a cheap production music company to maintain a veneer of "network solidarity" and only aired in times where dead air, a PSA or a low-cost local ad would usually go and except for the lower-tier stations, never used outside of that) and a magnet for list vandals like User:Dingbat2007 who make lists like this regular targets of their "fun". I completely agree with this nomination; network affiliate lists and histories are notable because they're easily confirmed and sourceable; network slogans are much more tenuous and only of interest to mostly television historians, and like whatever branding Nickelodeon introduces for their afternoon block every six weeks, quickly forgotten beyond embarrassments like "Our pride is showing" and "We love TV" (Note: this rationale is being used for all of these nominations as if it was a block nomination). Nate • (chatter) 07:51, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep As I said over at the Network Ten slogans AfD, deleting this will seem like a cliched example of systemic bias. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 22:30, 19 July 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.