Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K&C Video

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. Randykitty (talk) 16:52, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

K&C Video

[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)

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Aoziwe with the following rationale "I too am not convinced of the notability of the subject. However, the subject may well be considered iconic by some people and they may well be able to dig up sufficient IRS, etc. Accordingly, I think before this one is deleted, it should go to AfD for a broader discussion". Fair enough - can anyone find anything to salvage this? WP:BEFORE produces a big fat zero (maybe the company name is mispelled?). The only link in the article goes to a forum, not even a subthread. At this point this could even be a WP:HOAX, through probably it is not, given it was created by an established and unblocked editor. But I very much doubt the company is notable. PS. If this is deleted, I'd suggest speedy deletion of Category:K&C Video which wouldn't survive a CfD even if this company was notable. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:38, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what search you are using, but a standard google search produces dozens of hits, including non English ones. I am not saying any of them are notabilty worthy though. Definitely not a hoax. Aoziwe (talk) 11:04, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 08:04, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 08:04, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 08:04, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 08:04, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would agree that the category should go regardless. I suspect it was created to hold all the VHS production or distribution tape releases by the company, that never had their own articles written or have since been deleted? Aoziwe (talk)
Comment I had a look on Trove for Australian newspapers that may ahe made a comment on this, but I found nothing. (Perhaps there is poor coverage of this time period though). Because of this I did not contest the prod. Don't count any significance as to me creating the page though, as it was done on behalf of an IP editor, when AFC standards were minimal. It just had to have a working reference. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not a hoax (found an ebay ad for a "rare" K&C videotape), but doesn't seem to be notable. If it had any real impact in its day, I would have expected some mention of it in a source I found on Ozploitation: Ryan , Mark David (2009) Whither culture? Australian horror films and the limitations of cultural policy or at least as a franchise filter on Best of/worst of Ozploitation movies. Schazjmd (talk) 01:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment holding off on !voting yet. The organisations' tape releases seem to be somewhat of collectors' items on sale sites, so I am a little surprised that they do not get written up somewhere. I have found the following weak mentions of uncertain reliability:

but nowhere near enough for notability. I am not too surprised TROVE is no help. TROVE to date is mainly much older listings and the subject here is preWWW. Aoziwe (talk) 10:38, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete As per my comments above. The subject looks as though it should be notable from what can be found, but there is nothing to allow any real attempt at core and in-depth. Aoziwe (talk) 09:09, 25 March 2019 (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.