Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BBC One 'Enjoy 2015'

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 delete. Closing after this was relisted as failing GNG.

Thanks for your contributions and assuming good faith on this decision. If you have a problem with it, please bring up your concerns at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Thank you and happy holidays! Missvain (talk) 21:07, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BBC One 'Enjoy 2015'

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:GNG. Pahiy (talk) 21:07, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Pahiy (talk) 21:07, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Pahiy (talk) 21:07, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom, this is a non notable topic. Ajf773 (talk) 09:36, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I disagree. This topic is notable and is part of the history of BBC One's presentation. Rillington (talk) 13:09, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Prove with sources if you can. Ajf773 (talk) 09:30, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 08:14, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Logo enthusiast sludge, zero-sourced; use your own wikis, please. Nate • (chatter) 00:13, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not sourced. Not shown to be notable.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 17:16, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In common with some other articles deleted here, this belongs (as suggested above) on a specialist anorak wiki, not a general one. RobinCarmody (talk) 19:22, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I would tend to agree with the view that this is something for a specialist site and does not have the level of notability that would warrant a Wikipedia article. Dunarc (talk) 23:42, 23 November 2021 (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.