Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Commercial replacement

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. Stifle (talk) 23:40, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial replacement

Declined A1 speedy. This article merely states that a "commercial replacement" is what takes the place of a commercial break on some channels (duh!) but gives no example of what such a replacement could consist of, hence my tagging. Delete. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 22:53, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete per nom. Were this cat an admin, he would have A1'd this at the drop of a cat-hat. But he isn't. No context, no assertion of notability, no possibility of this being more than a dicdef. Tevildo (talk) 22:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The better term for this would be make good, which does not have any need for an article here; there's no need for this at all as cable channels usually make space specifically for local ads, and direct response ads air on the channels themselves in place on the few systems without local ads. Nate • (chatter) 01:59, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Filler (media). See also Commercial bumper. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:11, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Neither of those terms would be appropriate merges, as this article just describes local ads on cable channels, which are neither filler or bumpers. Nate • (chatter) 09:50, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not mention local ads. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:17, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention that there is nothing to merge. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 11:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It does not say that specifically, but the only use for commercial replacement on cable/sat systems is for local/provider ads (the pitches for PPV, for instance). However, the sentence is so poorly written that it doesn't mention it as that use. Nate • (chatter) 05:03, 4 May 2009 (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.