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 redirect to Jason Stapleton. Redirect to subject of the program. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 19:37, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Jason Stapleton Program[edit]

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

I can't find any references to support the notability of this program. All the references are self published. It claims to be "the most downloaded podcast in the world" but that is only sourced back to the author's self-published bio. Note that the author has only ever worked on this article and the one about its "star", Jason Stapleton. Gronk Oz (talk) 05:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give me some time to make some changes and add more sources? Some references are self published by the Program as the wiki article is simply describing what the show talks about. It did not say "the most downloaded podcast in the world" but rather "contends to be the most downloaded libertarian podcast in the world". While this is true, there currently is no published source so I will remove it. This is my first article, but have been a user of Wikipedia for over a decade and have made edits with an older account. fingrpickr (talk) 14:15, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have made changes to adhere to the policy. Can you please let me know if anything seems incorrect? There remains a few self references, ie. explaining when the show started, but these are self evident facts. If it looks good, can we remove the banner? Thanks. fingrpickr (talk) 15:39, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom--this is an advert, complete with a listing of the subject's 'five principles of liberty.' I've placed templates for similar issues at Jason Stapleton, which may be similarly ripe for AfD. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 20:43, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The intent is not to be an advertisement. This podcast has over 30,000 daily listeners, so much like the Rubin Report page it simply exists to inform the general public of what the show is and who he is. I fail the litmus test to see what remains that is an advertisement. All information has been referenced by external sources, including FreedomWorks and Westwood One. Can you please explain so I can make changes, or otherwise remove the banners from both pages. Thanks. fingrpickr (talk) 23:36, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The AfD template on this article may not be removed until the discussion has been closed by an administrator. I'd advise against removing templates from the biography as well--if there is a WP:COI here, either as a paid writer or as someone who is associated with the subjects, that conflict of interest must be divulged. The Rubin Report, with all its primary sourcing, also has problems. But that's not what's being discussed here. Thanks, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:21, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom; this page fails general guidelines for notability as lacking reliable sources. Podcasts, blogs, and the like are so common as to be run of the mill and generally are deleted. Wikipedia is a private charity -- it is not a webhost for other media and is not a soapbox. This podcast is nowhere near as popular as the Rubin Report and even if connected somehow does not get automatic notability. The creator's good intent is irrelevant to the discussion about notability. Bearian (talk) 17:18, 15 November 2016 (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.