Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CTS Weekly

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:36, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CTS Weekly

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

Cute page--I like the fake Comic Con photos. But basically a non-notable YouTube channel created by 9th grade students. Michitaro (talk) 14:37, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt. It's nice that they have the "get up and go" to do all of this, but the fact remains that even with the fact that there are no reliable sources to show that this youtube channel has any sort of notability, the article has huge issues with neutrality and is pretty much an ad for the channel. I recommend salting this, as it looks like it might have been previously speedied on the 13th and was re-added by the same editor later. I would also recommend a deletion of the user's sandbox page as well, since they have a copy of the page in their sandbox.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 14:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the obvious reasons. Nice work, though. Something that would a probably impress a potential employer if they found it in some web archive ten years from now. However, right now I'm concerned about it including real names of ninth graders, so salt for that reason if no other.--Shirt58 (talk) 02:56, 19 May 2012 (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.